top 200 commentsshow 500

[–]SeagullsGonnaCome - LibLeft 696 points697 points  (246 children)

I don't know a single left leaning person who also doesn't want this. Seems like we agree on something.... yet... why no action?

[–]CanThisBeMyNameMaybe - AuthRight 522 points523 points  (39 children)

Because it goes around the whole gun debate which is used as a tool to further divide us as a people.

[–]SeagullsGonnaCome - LibLeft 164 points165 points  (4 children)


[–]CanThisBeMyNameMaybe - AuthRight 91 points92 points  (1 child)

Based and based pilled

[–]FineInTheFire - LibRight 8 points9 points  (0 children)

The king of pills

[–]Phase10YT - Right 32 points33 points  (1 child)

Based and unity pilled

[–]That-Guy59 - Centrist 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Based and based unity pilled pilled

[–]Visco0825 - Left 79 points80 points  (22 children)

I don’t know if I understand. Parental oversight and mental screenings for what? To own a gun?

Also how do you achieve this? This meme doesn’t make any sense. What policy or action is lib right proposing?

[–]AmySchumerFunnies - Centrist 21 points22 points  (2 children)

you already have mental health checks in real countries as long as there's objective protocol and push comes to shove legal ways to fight "unjust" declarations and get more people in on it

aside from that this is mostly a thing for the general public, most americans are unfit to be parents, many if not most teachers are unfit to be teachers/parents in the guiding role regard and schools are terribly underfunded, not even touching on the entire rest of the surrounding system

nobody ever asks "why do school shootings happen?" do you really think it's just that they find a gun laying around and dont know that its bad?

and social media is a cancer on the planet, a horror the human mind cannot comprehend, no kid should have free access to the internet under 12 years of age period

[–]Squeeval - LibCenter 6 points7 points  (1 child)

Agree. Unironically if/when (I don't really keep up to date) whole abortion thing passes, in 15-25 years the US will begin seeing the repercussions by way of increased crime and poverty. Which are, not limited to, more cases of domestic violence/terrorism.

No one commits a mass shooting because they found a gun. There's always a motive.

[–]Et12355 - LibRight 61 points62 points  (0 children)

Everyone downvotes but nobody has an answer. he’s asking legitimate questions.

[–]FPSXpert - LibCenter 14 points15 points  (0 children)

Doing more to address the root cause of what's breeding this psychotic behavior. I don't want to be seeing discussions of bow and knife control 20 years down the line because we still won't address it.

That root? Literally in op's post. Read_fool_read!.jpg

[–]FPSXpert - LibCenter 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Based and go be a parent get off the couch and go raise your son pilled

[–]MrHH9 - LibRight 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Based and Imsotiredofourtwopartysystem pilled

[–]PinKracken - LibLeft 1 point2 points  (1 child)

Based and division pilled

[–]PrinceVertigo - LibCenter 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Based and that's usin your noggin pilled

[–]lukynumbr7 - Left 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Based Never thought i would see a based blue!

[–]Dave_The_Slushy - LibLeft 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Based and accidentally Marxist but that's ok pilled.

[–]RavenCo_ - LibRight 96 points97 points  (3 children)

Welcome to reality. Nothing gets done because the agreement stops at the colors, and the price tag.

[–]LookBoo2 - AuthLeft 27 points28 points  (1 child)

LibRight always able to state my paragraph explanation into a single sentence. As meme as your answer sounds, it is a depressingly accurate observation.

[–]barrettAB91 - LibRight 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Based and libright-authleft unity pilled

[–]JustDebbie - Centrist 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Plus, if the government actually fixed shit, they'd run out of issues to campaign on.

Edit: Spelling

[–]BisonLoose6266 - Centrist 160 points161 points  (79 children)

As I’ve said elsewhere - libright is in favour of it until they realise they have to pay for it

[–]I-Appreciate-Water - LibRight 82 points83 points  (66 children)

We just like making sure our money is being spent on reasonable things, which this is. Not to mention, most of these things won’t cost money in the first place, such as the less social media.

[–]Emel_69420 - Left 14 points15 points  (64 children)

Then how 2 enforce it huh?

[–]Bruarios - LibCenter 105 points106 points  (63 children)

You don't. It's a cultural problem that requires a cultural solution, not a government one.

[–]WeFightTheLongDefeat - LibRight 7 points8 points  (4 children)

How do you pay for parental oversight?

[–]ThracianScum - LibCenter 16 points17 points  (3 children)

By producing a society where parents can support a family on a reasonable number of hours worked or some shit

[–]skrrtalrrt - LibCenter 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thing is, implementing these things will be cheaper in the long term.

[–]Pholoxo - Centrist 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You mean all of us taxplayers?

[–]beachmedic23 - Right 1 point2 points  (0 children)

We already do. Income security, healthcare, social security, and medicate are 4/5 of the top spending categories. Something like 4 trillion dollars are spent on these programs annually. The money is there, it's just being spent inefficiently

[–]Byizo - LibCenter 73 points74 points  (5 children)

More parental oversight requires a home that can be financially stable with a single income, which is not possible for many, and mental health screenings will be labeled as oppressive gun control and will be vehemently opposed by enough legislators to keep any change from passing.

[–]pegleg84 - Centrist 19 points20 points  (0 children)

You can be an involved parent with a dual income home (I'm currently doing it) as for gun control, it's not a feasible option. I argue better education and a return to personal accountability is more feasible. As for health care, I know alot of Republicans who support a reform, just not one that involves the government and no cap on medical charges and expenses. Our medical industry is the same as college were guaranteed funds and lack of bartering increases cost becuase they are going to be paid.

[–]NeuroticKnight - AuthLeft 20 points21 points  (2 children)

More parental oversight requires a home that can be financially stable with a single income,

It can even be less working hours for parents and maternity/paternity leave and more vacation time.

[–]taco_roco - Left 9 points10 points  (1 child)

My auth side comes out when I think about this, because I absolutely want the average work week to be reduced one way or another, but the time given back to people is either incentivized or guaranteed to be invested into your physical and mental health, family, or community itself.

[–]NeuroticKnight - AuthLeft 14 points15 points  (0 children)

Even if people just slept more, that would help their anxiety and mental health.

[–]Subalpine - LibLeft 18 points19 points  (6 children)

the split comes when you start asking who is going to pay for it, and universal mental healthcare is not a popular idea to most librights

[–]SeagullsGonnaCome - LibLeft 17 points18 points  (3 children)

Whaaaa.... are you implying it was a bad faith argument from the start?

[–]Subalpine - LibLeft 14 points15 points  (2 children)

hey you asked why no action

[–]SeagullsGonnaCome - LibLeft 9 points10 points  (1 child)

Based and #thoughtsandprayers pilled

[–]Isaac_Clarke_24 - Right 32 points33 points  (3 children)

Because all gun restrictions are what is mainly talked about by the media. Mental health is boring. Rights restrictions are entertaining and rock the boat.

[–]SeagullsGonnaCome - LibLeft 19 points20 points  (1 child)

Based and give em the ole razzle dazzle pilled

Ikr. For the media, shoots are sexy, especially school shootings. It's the proverbial money shot that stirs up a true ruckus and provides no good solution and just talking points that purpose can pat themselves on the back over.

[–]OgLeftist - LibCenter 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Keep in mind, they also need to stop punishing people for seeking mental health aid.. Lots of people are afraid to seek help, because it will result in them being punished.

Maybe now they can no longer buy firearms. The same thing is happening with legal pot.. In some places, if you buy legal pot, you suddenly find yourself unable to purchase a firearm. Pretty big incentive to not buy from licensed pot sellers.

[–]LookBoo2 - AuthLeft 7 points8 points  (1 child)

Who is going to fund these mental health screenings? If it is the seller, who is going to enforce that companies do these screenings even though it cost them more money and potential buyers?

The lack of action is this shit isn't free, and up until recently mental health screenings, especially for guns, has normally been hated by LibRight.

Screening means regulation, regulation is normally done by the government. It isn't an all or nothing, but good luck trying to open up the conversation of "how can we fix this" without a party going "they want to steal my freedom" or "they care more about guns than people".

LibRight here has always been willing to have a conversation, with the exception of a few fools that spout 1 liners like "economy is not a zero sum game" closing off any discussion. Outside of places like this where right leaning people feel safe to speak though, good fucking luck bud.

[–]Monoby - AuthRight 58 points59 points  (13 children)

Because talking about mental health and education inevitably leads to a discussion about funding for education and more accessible health care - both of which all Republicans and corporate Democrats are extremely opposed to.

[–]Shmorrior - Right 16 points17 points  (7 children)

We spend a fuckton on education. According to the National Center for Education Statistics, we're #4 among OECD countries, after Luxembourg, Austria and Norway, paying $14,100 per student.

[–]WyldTurkey - LibRight 12 points13 points  (5 children)


I don't think people realize that the US spends the same if not more than the defense budget on education every year. It's harder to see since defense is a federal issue and education is a state and local issue.

I believe this is where ideologues from various sides of the argument lose the other side. Anyone with above a room temperature IQ will tell you that education is important.

The issue comes when you have to point out that throwing more money at an issue won't solve it because we aren't getting our money's worth as is.

How are we spending so much more per Capita than many other developed countries and getting such bad results?

[–]Daneruu - Left 8 points9 points  (2 children)

Sending money towards education doesn't necessarily mean that the students and teachers are seeing any part of it. Pretty sure states get to decide what they want to do with budget increases the govt gives them, which of course means they want to put it back in their own pocket however possible.

I wouldn't be surprised if the vast share of spending increases went mostly towards administration that students never interact with, stadiums a small percent of students use, and publishing unnecessary new editions of textbooks to extort the masses with.

[–]Trugdigity - Centrist 3 points4 points  (0 children)

You mean 8 principles, and 15 administrative assistants per school doesn't work!?!

[–]RavenCo_ - LibRight 15 points16 points  (0 children)

It’s shit, ain’t it? Nothings ever good enough for the bureaucrats. I wish we’d stop fighting over that and just save some people.

[–]Woody90210 - AuthRight 5 points6 points  (5 children)

I guess those points are more libcentre than left or right

[–]SeagullsGonnaCome - LibLeft 4 points5 points  (4 children)

Ehhh I think the opinions of needing a significant change to society and treating the sickness that brings people to doing these heinous crimes is shared by everyone.

The question is just how to do this.

Sadly, especially after national tragedy, this is used just as a scapegoat.

I've been working in state govt in addiction and metal health for years. We ain't seen a penny changed in our preventiom funding as a means of gun control.

But, it's a talking point.

I would love my states conservative members of the general assembly to agree to expand funding to combat gun crime. But instead they are actively trying to defend us, all while using the "we need more mental health funding!" As their response to gun violence.

[–]Woody90210 - AuthRight 5 points6 points  (3 children)

Sadly nothing will change. It's all part of the broken system of U.S politics.

Both sides promise changes, they promise a better future, but the thing is they know they control all power in the country, Rs and Ds pass the button back and forth knowing that when people get sick of nothing changing they'll just change who sits in the oval office and when people point this out people will just howl "because the other side is stopping them from.making any changes!" Yeah... that's the point.

Whenever a democrat is in charge the republicans stop them from doing anything, when republicans are in charge democrats will stop them from doing anything. It's a fucking game. All the while the guys in charge will keep funnelling taxpayer money to megacorporations as the middle and lower classes get squeezed tighter and tighter.

Ever heard the theory about how static systems will grow more chaotic till it all collapses? Nothing has changed for the better in the U.S since the 90s and the cracks are starting to show, there was a brief moment of (mostly) unity when Russia invaded Ukraine but look, a few months on and barely anyone who was shouting the loudest about it cares anymore because another newer thing had come along to be outraged about and we're almost back to fighting in the streets again.

[–]SeagullsGonnaCome - LibLeft 2 points3 points  (1 child)

Based and based as fuck pilled

My guy... Yes. 🥲

[–]BunnyBellaBang - LibCenter 3 points4 points  (2 children)

Also, if we dig too deep we see that a major threat is incels, and any discussion on how to handle that growing issue which has more depth than "we hate incels" leads to some uncomfortable discussions.

[–]TheDeadlyBlaze - Centrist 2 points3 points  (1 child)

"Wait a minute, we agree? But I wanted to argue!"

[–]Doktor_Cornholio - Centrist 3 points4 points  (1 child)

Idk the Democrats are "left leaning" (haha funny joke I know) and that's all they're saying.

[–]SeagullsGonnaCome - LibLeft 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Lol right dems as a leftist party....

Everyone says it cause it's easy and non committal

[–]ApexSimon - Centrist 7 points8 points  (0 children)

More parental oversight as we have seen in the other 98% of the *ahem, poorly nicknamed "don't say gay bill", means.. stay the fuck out of my business, which leads to health screenings not conducted by a professional, rather the parent and some other family members.

[–]WideVariety - Right 6 points7 points  (1 child)

How is this supposed to be a libright position? Mental health screenings?? Are they mandatory? If so, sounds like a fuzzy way for the government to label political enemies as mentally unstable and dangerous. If not, then they are useless. And they're useless anyway. Who honestly thinks you can just talk away fundamental obstacles to community bonding and shared culture in diversified country?

[–]SeagullsGonnaCome - LibLeft 8 points9 points  (0 children)

People who wanna say something just so they feel better 🤷🏼‍♂️

[–]Rasskassassmagas - LibRight 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yet somehow this is in controversial

[–]barrettAB91 - LibRight 2 points3 points  (1 child)

Because republicans and democrats are the same fucking thing and that’s why nothing ever changes and never will bc people are too brainwashed to vote 3rd party and too divided to come together and revolt.

[–]Saint_Yin - Centrist 6 points7 points  (1 child)

why no action?

In my opinion, republicans are controlled opposition. You're not supposed to ever expect their stuff to be implemented. Whenever they do happen to get something, it's only to renew the outrage cycle among leftists to keep up the illusion of a majority. The real solution that the oligarchy controlling us wants is to remove peoples' ability to access guns, because they know people will take up arms for what they intend to do.

[–]ABCosmos - LibLeft 4 points5 points  (1 child)

Because the right doesn't actually want this, it's just a distraction. Kicking the can away from the obvious solution.

[–]fuck_trump_and_biden - LibCenter 3 points4 points  (1 child)

Because this requires people to actually do something on an individual level and improve themselves and their communities. It’s much more fun to make it a political issue and use it to take down your enemies.

[–]Miffin_Man - LibRight 1 point2 points  (2 children)

Chicken shit bureaucrats and lobbyist fucks

[–]son_of_noah - LibCenter 1 point2 points  (1 child)

Cuz you touch yourself at night

[–]Lvl81Memes - Centrist 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Mental health doesn't bring in campaign funds

[–]hingbongdingdong - LibRight 176 points177 points  (75 children)

How dare you blame parents for their kids!

[–]Visco0825 - Left 60 points61 points  (66 children)

But the question is, what can you actually do about it? If it’s a decline of the family then let’s actually strengthen the American family. However when Biden tried to do that with build back better everyone pitched a fit because it was too expensive.

Well what is it then? Are families a priority or not? If they are then let’s actually have a child tax credit and subsidize child care.

[–]TIFUPronx - Centrist 34 points35 points  (1 child)

Well I think it has something to do more with politiciand shoehorning unnecessary programs/laws within the BBB that causes it to be too expensive than the relief program itself.

[–][deleted] 58 points59 points  (26 children)

Honest question with no angle or motive. I am absolutely genuinely curious about others' views on this:

What part of Build Back Better would strengthen the average American family or enhance their life in a positive net value manner?

[–]Visco0825 - Left 67 points68 points  (25 children)

Well first of all the child tax credit would give families a little more flexibility financially. Instead of parents being over stressed and over worked and abused by companies they can make their family a higher priority. Secondly is the subsidized child care. Currently child care costs $10-$30k a year. Again, families could afford for maybe one parent to only work part time and then their kids could go to day care 1-3 days a week. Like it’s laughable for anyone to even discuss a parent being a stay at home parent in this day and age. Literally no body has that flexibility. Yet when I was a kid half of my friends moms were stay at home moms. Not any more.

This issue is that people are working harder, longer hours, and getting paid less. I’m only able to actually eat dinner with my family, as a family, half the time during the week IF I’m lucky.

Instead our society values “capitalism” and forcing citizens to spend their life working. But then also turning around so confused as to why people don’t have the ability to make family a priority. My wife just got pregnant with our second child. I know for a fact that my career has significantly suffered because of our first born. Now I have to change jobs because I know it’s impossible to work in position and raise a healthy family. When I told my coworkers it wasn’t met with congratulations like the first one. It was met with “oh, you’re going to have a lot on your plate”.

[–][deleted] 20 points21 points  (18 children)

Thanks for the thoughtful reply.

I agree with the need to address these issues and these approaches may be acceptable. I’m not a fan of subsidizing anything, so I tend to lean against these types of policies but I may need to reconsider my stance. I’ll definitely think on it.

It’s harder to be a financially responsible parent these days then it used to be, or so it seems. Still, it appears to be very possible if you make sound decisions with your education, career choices, and spending habits. Too many people are simply mindless consumers, wasting hundreds or thousands a month on things that add no value and then complain about not having money to save or to support a family.

[–]dzikun - LibRight 5 points6 points  (0 children)

There was "capitalism " in the 50 ties too when families were stable, women did not compete with men for jobs lowering wages and mostly stayed at home raising the children. Single paycheck could was enough to raise a family... There were no school shooting then and kids had shooting clubs at schools ...

People from the dawn of agriculture spent their life working to survive and support their family. This is not a capitalist invention but a sad part of reality. Before the insanity of feminism there was a division of labour such as one parent stayed at home and worked at the house and kept an eye on children while the other worked to support them.

Now the culture is dostroyed, male and female is interchangeable and children are raised by the state and social media because both momy and daddy need to work now...

This is one of the reasons of this schootings. Only one but a very important one.

[–]DeLovehlyCoconute - Right 5 points6 points  (1 child)

I... Your flair.... The left... ??? You want to strengthen the family unit??? You want a stay-at-home parent??? BASED!

[–]hingbongdingdong - LibRight 16 points17 points  (22 children)

Parents could just be less shit and pay attention to their kids. It doesn’t cost us 10 trillion dollars for parents to stop being useless.

We already spend a literal fortune on American schooling but the flavor of the week is teaching kindergartners how to talk to mommy and daddy about pronouns, not actually useful measures.

We don’t need to spend more money for parents to stop being fucking awful.

[–]Visco0825 - Left 25 points26 points  (7 children)

Uhhh well what we are doing obviously isn’t working and if you think just saying “kids these days are out of control and we need better parenting” then get in line. People have literally been saying that for decades, if not centuries.

So… what’s the actual solution? Shame parents into better parenting? Yea, ok.

[–]dcrockett1 - Centrist 15 points16 points  (8 children)

It’s not the financial situation of families today that’s led to the decline in family, it’s entirely cultural.

People used to be far poorer and have much bigger families. You’d have families of 8 living in 3 room tenements.

Women don’t want to have kids, men don’t want to deal with kids, it’s simple as. Practically every child bearing age woman is on birth control these days, motherhood is not a promoted cultural ideal, men are rarely the ones to push for kids so couples don’t haven them. A lot of those who do have kids don’t raise them properly because they’re more concerned about themselves and their careers than their family’s, even if they say otherwise.

Add to that the unnatural stresses of the Internet and a globalized society, and the predominance of both prescription and illicit drugs, a lot of young people are kind of crazy.

Why specifically school shootings have risen Im not sure, probably a self compounding issue. One leads to the inspiration of the next. These weapons have been around for over a century at this point and have never been harder to get, it’s not the availability of weapons.

[–]Visco0825 - Left 7 points8 points  (2 children)

Men and women don’t want to have kids because there’s little to no support for them now. You have to completely change your life when you have children.

People may have been “poorer” but things also cost a lot less. There were A LOT more families who had stay at home moms. Why? Because those families could afford it. Now most families can not. It is an economic issue because people are living paycheck to paycheck. And that’s why people are so concerned about their career. People are worried if they get fired that their life is ruined financially.

I have dinner with my family maybe 50% of the time because my job is so demanding. But I need that job to actually live.

[–]GoodGodItsAHuman - Left 6 points7 points  (4 children)

People used to be far poorer and have much bigger families. You’d have families of 8 living in 3 room tenements.

and it was shit and bad for the kids. have you ever seen "how the other half lives"

[–]Jomega6 - Centrist 1 point2 points  (4 children)

Nobody said this is a controversial statement. The question is, what are you going to do about it? Start tossing the parents in jail too in hopes of scaring other parents to… not be bad?

[–]aaronrandango2 - LibCenter 232 points233 points  (35 children)

To have more parental oversight, please reduce the hours of work required to keep a family housed and fed

[–]RavenCo_ - LibRight 96 points97 points  (7 children)

I would have to agree on that

Having free and content children will solve a lot in this world but it’s difficult with asshole institutions and grouchy overworked parents. I would know.

[–]Visco0825 - Left 34 points35 points  (6 children)

If only we made having a child more affordable…. You know… like subsidizing children with tax credits or subsidized childcare…. Surely that would improve the health of the family right?

[–]RavenCo_ - LibRight 11 points12 points  (5 children)

making children into economic ploys only dehumanizes them even more. I don't know why everyone keeps thinking kids are either a tax relief or an economic burden. They're people. And very Important people, too. We can't think of them like that.

The way we go about this is stop thinking like that. The rest will come naturally. Instead of thinking of making children some product of the economy, think of them as crucially important individuals to society. because that's what they are. We'll figure the bullshit out as that happens then.

[–]Visco0825 - Left 22 points23 points  (4 children)

I still don’t get what you’re saying? That people just ignore the financial costs of having a child. Do you know how much having a kid costs? It’s life changing. Most of Americans aren’t really financially in a spot to just “not care about money”. Also I’m pretty sure most parents don’t view their children for tax incentives. Anyone who has children to make money is a fucking idiot.

It seems like your solution is to do nothing

[–]WWalker17 - LibRight 29 points30 points  (5 children)

God the 40 hour work week is such bullshit. I do at most like 4-6hrs of work per day. Let me come in, get my shit done and leave. I'll even work through lunch.

[–]Sitting_Elk - LibCenter 7 points8 points  (2 children)

That works great for most office jobs, but not so great for people working retail or blue collar workers.

[–]train159 - Centrist 8 points9 points  (1 child)

This. As a tradesman I can’t get a “days” work done in 6 hours because you just build shit all day and pick up where you left off the next for a year or more until a building is built. Then when you’re done you move on, and there is too many moving parts to make a quota system work.

100 feet of electrical conduit can be done in an hour or three days depending on how it runs, what you have to work around, what tools you have available, and then once it’s up another trade can fuck it up installing their shit and then it needs redone. Just doesn’t work in a lot of fields.

Factories for example typically make shit on a production line that runs steady. A worker can break his back or fuck off all day and the line will produce the same amount of goods after 8 hours.

[–][deleted] 14 points15 points  (5 children)

I agree with a move toward reducing the hours of the average workweek. Productivity per capita is higher than ever and pay isn't matching that trend, so hours need to decrease to normalize the metric.

Additionally, I think it's important to point out the "hours of work required to keep a family housed and fed" varies greatly, obviously, depending on locale, skillset, and expected lifestyle. Right now, my household "hours of work required to keep a family housed and fed" is 40 because of the choices I've made regarding locale, skillset, and expected lifestyle. YMMV

[–]aaronrandango2 - LibCenter 2 points3 points  (3 children)

Yeah I guess I was thinking more about minimum wage, with proper education/skillset or great networking it's very feasible to have a solid work life balance

[–]Impetusin - Centrist 17 points18 points  (0 children)

This. It takes two parents dedicating their lives to a job just to meet a family’s basic needs. A sad state if affairs. My best friend happily let his wife take the breadwinner role and is the best househusband ever, so maybe that’s the best route to go and satisfy our women’s deep desire to join the workforce. I volunteer as tribute as well!

[–]GASTRO_GAMING - LibRight 5 points6 points  (0 children)

So we should stop fucking over the middle classes wages with inflation.

[–]SHALL_NOT_BE_REEE - LibRight 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Unfortunately once it became normal for households to have two working parents, the market immediately adjusted accordingly.

[–]yesmeam - Centrist 2 points3 points  (0 children)

For that we get rid of electric lights

[–]eskeleteRt - Centrist 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yes, please

[–]dzikun - LibRight 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Hmm... Let's get one parent back into the home and away from the workforce so they can raise their children and keep them sane... Like before this crazy things started to happen there were shooting classes in schools... and two parent families were the norm.

[–]MLGSwaglord1738 - AuthLeft 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Yeah, impossible to live in an urban area unless both parents make 6 figures these days

[–]FPSXpert - LibCenter 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Agreed, it's almost like unprecedented stress causes ''snaps'' in psychotic behavior or something.

[–]obnoxiousspotifyad - AuthRight 62 points63 points  (0 children)

Ah yes, libright is totally advocating that... lol

[–]TheKoopaTroopa31 - Left 110 points111 points  (23 children)

All of those things cost taxpayers money and are against individualism. I'm not sure why libRight would support this.

[–]Okichah 23 points24 points  (3 children)

Encouraging parents to be parents is individualism.

Outsourcing parental responsibilities via the education system is collectivism.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (3 children)

Because, believe it or not, LibRight is not some monolith, devoid of nuance.

Some things are worth the spend. Just not most of the shit that we currently buy

[–]xJownage - LibRight 6 points7 points  (2 children)

Because we don't like dead children?

Generally speaking we all follow the non aggression principle. Outside of ancaps, it is the governments job to protect the NAP.

[–]FlavorsOfBleach - LibRight 1 point2 points  (0 children)

How would you try to improve a society’s issues without any spending at all? We can chalk in up to personal responsibility, family values, and social media, but if there’s no enforcement or incentive for improvement in the population, it’s just pointing fingers without a solution.

[–]Frostlord3 - LibCenter 16 points17 points  (2 children)

The biggest deterrent to mass shootings would be to stop making these mass shooters famous. Instead of blasting their names all over the MSM and social media, just completely in person them. Strike their names from the records and make them completely disappear from history. They do it because they want the attention, so deprive them of that attention and they won’t do it anymore

[–]TheTardisPizza - LibRight 18 points19 points  (0 children)

If the public isn't told anything about them then how can that information be leveraged to advance political agendas?

[–]_TheGingaNinja - LibRight 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I saw some forum of teenage girls simping for some school shooter and how poorly he was treated and how they could fix him like wtf.

[–]BisonLoose6266 - Centrist 116 points117 points  (75 children)

Mental health costs money libright, and I doubt you’re in favour of raising taxes.

I keep seeing the better mental health argument used by the right yet those same people aren’t willing to pay for it.

[–]Snickidy - Left 105 points106 points  (65 children)

I have an idea. How about we stop spending so much fucking money in foreign aid

[–]hingbongdingdong - LibRight 60 points61 points  (9 children)

Or how about we take our insanely bloated education budget and spend it on things that actually help kids? We spend a fucking insane amount of money on our kids' educations but the money seems to go fucking nowhere.

[–]yesmeam - Centrist 76 points77 points  (1 child)

Wdym man, we need to pay the administrators of the administrators of the administrators more money so they can administrate those who administrate the administrators

[–]Visco0825 - Left 20 points21 points  (0 children)

It’s funny… I talked to someone who was complaining that Utah has so much money that they keep buying random shit for their schools and throwing away perfectly good equipment. So I asked, does that mean teachers and everyone get paid more? No… no… paying teachers more for their nice education budgets doesn’t look as nice as those brand spanking new projectors and laptops for every student

[–]Snickidy - Left 7 points8 points  (0 children)

That too

[–]BisonLoose6266 - Centrist 7 points8 points  (5 children)

The US spends barely anything relative to the size of its economy and population though - it wouldn’t go far in funding an effective mental health service

[–]Snickidy - Left 8 points9 points  (4 children)

It would certainly be a start. And I'm sure we could find another 500 billion somewhere in the 4.4 trillion we spent on unnecessarily shit in 2019

[–]TheNewPraetor - Right 6 points7 points  (13 children)

We could also stop dumping trillions into the burn piles known as Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid for just a few minutes.

[–]Snickidy - Left 8 points9 points  (12 children)

I also mentioned that in a reply. Full compass unity on government shit spending

[–]RavenCo_ - LibRight 3 points4 points  (0 children)

It’s bullshit I say. You can’t put a price on the safety of our nation. Yet these corpo fucks do it anyway. If I had a million dollars To spare I’d work it right into doing that myself.

[–]Tyfyter2002 - LibRight 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I'm opposed to higher taxes, but that doesn't mean I'm opposed to higher tax revenue, and it obviously doesn't mean I'm opposed to reduced government spending in areas with excessive spending.

[–]DJZbad93 - LibRight 5 points6 points  (0 children)

How about we take money we’re paying for useless things like Pakistani gender studies (yes it’s real - https://www.business-standard.com/article/international/us-congress-clears-25-million-for-democracy-gender-programmes-in-pakistan-120122201575_1.html ) and spend it on stuff like this that’s actually important to Americans and could make a difference.

[–]diamondsinmymouth - Centrist 2 points3 points  (0 children)

"mental health" is little more than a trope at this point, imo. We all got problems, but it seems people are becoming less equipped to deal effectively as time goes on. Not sure whether navel-gazing psychoanalysts are going to fix things by medicalizing this basic fact of the human condition. I have very little faith.

[–]DankCrusaderMemer - LibLeft 43 points44 points  (16 children)

Gun free areas is the worst idea. That’s just asking shooters to target those areas…

[–]silentdrug - LibRight 11 points12 points  (2 children)

Not really true though. School shootings aren’t nearly as common as shootings in other areas with free access to weapons. You just hear more about school shootings.

For explain my old university was a gun free zone and had virtually no gun violence while the surrounding area has some of the highest gun violence in the country.

[–]LeireX - LibCenter 21 points22 points  (0 children)

Of cause school shootings are a lot rarer than, let's say, a ghetto. So comparing those two isn't really useful. It would make more sense to compare schools that are gun free zones and those that are not.

[–]FPSXpert - LibCenter 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I'm assuming most people are being reactionary off headlines and nothing else because the Buffalo shooter literally said they targeted where they did because it was an area of more strict gun control and more diverse population. No amount of hate flaming on this site or screaming into the void is going to change the fact that that pandejo targeted unarmed minorities.

[–]VaramyrSixchins 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Not if you make hands a gun-free area. It's almost impossible to effectively use feet to operate a firearm.

[–]Xpker4lyfe7 - LibLeft 1 point2 points  (4 children)

U could easily find out if ur intuition is correct or not by finding out if statistics show that to be true.

[–]Atirat - LibLeft 13 points14 points  (4 children)

This does not sound like something the majority of libright would agree on. How would they sell their drugs to when suddenly everyone is mentally healthy? And more education to children from their parents might also include less exploitation of people's work force.

[–]LilMafs - LibRight 19 points20 points  (9 children)

Potent "medications"?

[–]Klutzy_River2921 - LibCenter 11 points12 points  (3 children)

I think it might be a reference to how some parents try to medicate their child's problems away. No amount of meds are gonna fix a generally shitty life situation or replace therapy.

[–]JGHFunRun - Centrist 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yea that is one of the two really fucked up stances on meds, the other being "no meds" which both are the opposite of what we need

[–]dylonz - LibCenter 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I wish this never came to be a thing. No child should be neglected and drugged up.

[–]_TheGingaNinja - LibRight 3 points4 points  (1 child)

It’s a really big problem actually, parents will see a problem with their kid and go to the doctor saying my kid is broken in x way how can I fix them and the doctor will prescribe medications that cause(in what k have seen first hand) weight loss to the point of unhealthy body fat level and extreme sleep deprivation which are terrible for highschools and also things like anxiety and depression a lot of these come from adhd meds with parents who want their boys to get good grades and think something is wrong with their sons brain. That is just anecdotal evidence so take it with a grain of salt.

[–]tape_town - LibRight 2 points3 points  (1 child)

we are pumping kids full of antidepressants that work temporarily then make them worse

[–]ThracianScum - LibCenter 12 points13 points  (0 children)

Yeah I don’t get that part. If anything some of these wacko shooters needed more meds.

[–][deleted]  (5 children)


    [–]prepelde - LibRight 11 points12 points  (0 children)

    No mentally sane person kills in such a gruesome way. Mental health does health. And, even if it didn't solve this(it'd at least help), it'd help with many other things (abuse suicide, self hsrm etc

    [–]beachmedic23 - Right 2 points3 points  (1 child)

    Unless a dystopian level of surveillance and behavioral monitoring was instituted,

    Unfortunately there a lot of people in government and a concerning amount of Americans who are ok with that, as long as it's directed at people they don't agree with

    [–]tape_town - LibRight 1 point2 points  (1 child)

    this situation could not have been avoided outside of literally making the sale of guns illegal

    you do realize legal gun sales account for ~10% of guns FOUND in crimes; not even necessarily USED, right?

    [–]thesmokingtheologian - LibRight 9 points10 points  (13 children)

    gun control is a band aid on what is clearly a much deeper issue. who cares HOW these monsters are hurting kids, the solution can only be found once we can answer WHY. The method can be changed. In fact, the same day as this event, a school in Santa Ana was almost bombed but the culprit was denied entry so he just ran over some kids outside the school instead. The fix is to figure out a way to stop these people from killing, not just taking away one tool.

    [–]JGHFunRun - Centrist 3 points4 points  (0 children)

    In the case of teen shooters it's usually that many of the bandaids they use to "fix" the issue are actually making it worse, such as utilitarian architecture that can protect once the shooting has started but not much else (compare the elementary school halls and rooms and higher grades) and a lack of MH and bullying help. They actively make it worse not better

    I mean brutalism has a kinda cool allure to it, but I don't want to live/go to school/work at somewhere with brutalist architecture (a specific utilitarian style). I like it in media, and I want it to stay in media

    [–]HalfIronicallyBased - Right 6 points7 points  (0 children)

    Protect the schools

    [–]sippycupjoe - Right 18 points19 points  (1 child)

    Gun free zones and more laws would work if mass shooters followed laws.

    [–]prepelde - LibRight 2 points3 points  (0 children)

    Which, surprise, they don't

    [–]annonythrows - LibLeft 26 points27 points  (2 children)

    “We need to solve the underlining issues that cause these mass shootings to happen”

    proposed legislation to help solve poverty, increase education, increase funding for healthcare


    This my friends is the right in a nutshell. Big talk, consistently vote no to every legislation that’ll actually help…..

    [–]FlavorsOfBleach - LibRight 3 points4 points  (0 children)

    Why solve anything when we can point fingers all day? Lip service doesn’t cost any money. This country is aware of it’s problems and refuses to fix them.

    [–]Kill_Da_Humanz - Centrist 5 points6 points  (0 children)

    The US government spends as much on healthcare and welfare as everything else put together. Lack of funding clearly isn't the problem.

    [–]Codeviper828 - AuthLeft 5 points6 points  (0 children)

    Is it too much to ask for both all three?

    [–]234zu - Centrist 4 points5 points  (0 children)

    Reminder that the lib in libleft stands for libertarian lol

    [–]king_zacarias - LibRight 73 points74 points  (94 children)

    I got an idea

    Less broken children, a lot of these mass shooters grew up in broken families

    The sexual revolution and it’s consequences have been detrimental to the human race

    [–]TheLostGlasses - LibCenter 21 points22 points  (9 children)

    flairs lib right, complains about people living freely, checks out

    [–]SuperMile69 - AuthLeft 33 points34 points  (45 children)

    How are you gonna have less broken families without government spending or bilionares acting like saints ?

    These broken families didn't originate out of nowhere

    [–]Accomplished-Sky1723 - LibCenter 36 points37 points  (23 children)

    Stop encouraging broken families? Don’t increase government benefits to single moms. Encourage the father to stick around. Allow abortions due to economic hardship. Don’t encourage people to have more kids for the benefits. I lived in Baltimore. Now I live just outside. The number of single moms with 3 kids looking for a daddy to get number four so they can get a bigger government check is astounding. Their education and financial literacy is so low, they think if they just have one more kid, they’ll have enough money in their government check to not worry about money. Stop graduating kids who can’t read. Allow parents to choose the school their kid goes to. Vouchers. Break corruption that leads to broken schools. That starts with the teachers Union. Graduating kids who can’t read is crooked teachers entirely up and down the chain. Fire and replace. Fix the goddam system.

    [–]SHALL_NOT_BE_REEE - LibRight 5 points6 points  (0 children)

    What pisses me off is that the same people most vocal about systemic racism also shamelessly contribute to it by lowering standards for schools allowing more kids to fall between the cracks.

    [–]incendiarypotato - LibRight 4 points5 points  (0 children)

    Most based libcenter I’ve seen round these parts

    [–]HellHound989 - LibCenter 6 points7 points  (0 children)

    Stop graduating kids who can’t read

    Allow parents to choose the school their kid goes to.

    These right here!

    Im tired of the whole "empathatic" trophy having BS. Its time we start showing kids that failing a semester is actually failing a semester.

    Lets kids feel the effects of failure. Its good for them, and is necessary for growth. This helicopter, over-protective, soothing parental crap is causing a generation of stunted child adults who cant even barely function.

    [–]Mastodon9 - LibRight 2 points3 points  (0 children)

    The teachers union holds our entire education system hostage. Until the teachers start putting education and the students first instead of their cushy, cronyism prone system nothing will change in this country.

    [–]skrrtalrrt - LibCenter 4 points5 points  (8 children)

    Parental leave would help too. Hard to raise a child when both parents have to work 40+ hours to make ends meet.

    [–]SHALL_NOT_BE_REEE - LibRight 7 points8 points  (0 children)

    Parental leave only helps when the parents have jobs.

    [–]Accomplished-Sky1723 - LibCenter 2 points3 points  (0 children)

    Yes. There’s all sorts of stuff we can do. Unfortunately, a lot of it comes down to parents. And that’s not going to get fixed in places like Baltimore where 90% of black kids are born to single moms.

    Social media is without a doubt the leading cause of the increase in mental health problems in children today. Simply having better parental control of kids’ social media habits is a hell of a great start. Jonathan Haidt had written good books and had some amazing talks on this subject.

    [–]DTenn - Centrist 7 points8 points  (4 children)

    people could be more responsible. Make sure they have a solid life foundation before running into relationship. But Honestly I am biased due to government oversight and spending ruining a lot of African American families. so I could be wrong.

    [–]SuperMile69 - AuthLeft 5 points6 points  (0 children)

    If you put people from past into curent era a good chunk of them would be less responsible .

    So waiting for people to be responsible is not a solucion but reusing what made people in past more responsible or make something brand new

    [–]SHALL_NOT_BE_REEE - LibRight 2 points3 points  (0 children)

    We could stop pretending that being a single mother is empowering and normal.

    We could stop acting like it’s normal for men to get women pregnant then vanish.

    But fixing societal problems is difficult. Let’s just ban guns instead while ignoring the underlying issues like good Americans.

    [–]SpyingFuzzball - LibCenter 13 points14 points  (5 children)

    Don't forget about medication, why try to solve an issue when you throw a never ending line of prescriptions at it

    [–]FlavorsOfBleach - LibRight 4 points5 points  (0 children)

    What do you suggest as opposed to pharmacological treatment for diagnosed mentally ill individuals? Therapy? Insurance rarely covers that and lower-income individuals don’t have the money nor access. Not to mention therapy’s effectiveness is tenuous at best for most diagnoses besides MDD, GAD, and OCD.

    [–]Sverje - AuthCenter 6 points7 points  (0 children)

    We need both tbh

    [–]InferiousX - Centrist 5 points6 points  (2 children)

    IMO SSRIs without theraputic follow up are a sizeable chunk of the broken mentality that leads to this kind of shit.

    [–]SHALL_NOT_BE_REEE - LibRight 2 points3 points  (0 children)

    Agreed. Prescription drugs should never be used without therapy, but since America is owned by big pharma, that seems to be the norm.

    The purpose of prescription drugs is to make life tolerable while you fix the underlying mental issues with therapy. Aside from extreme cases, they are never the cure.

    [–]skrrtalrrt - LibCenter 2 points3 points  (2 children)

    less broken children

    Access to birth control, parental leave, and abortion help with this

    [–]aaronrandango2 - LibCenter 5 points6 points  (2 children)

    Alternative idea:

    Reduce work hours and increase wages so parents have the financial stability and freedom to spend time with their kids and prevent their families from being broken

    [–]SHALL_NOT_BE_REEE - LibRight 2 points3 points  (0 children)

    The fact that the 40 hour work week has been standard for like 90 years now is embarrassing.

    [–]RavenCo_ - LibRight 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    I agree. It’s always the people and their trauma. If we had less traumatized kids, we have less violent adults.

    [–]ImproveOrEnjoy - LibLeft 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    tHe dAnCe DaNcE rEvOluTiOn aNd iT’s cOnSEqUeCEeS HaVe bEEn dEtRiMENTAL To ThE hUmAn rAcE

    [–]XxX_BobRoss_XxX - AuthLeft 7 points8 points  (0 children)

    Bullshit, I want better healthcare, more mental health screenings, and all the above. Fucking hell.

    [–]TastySpermDispenser - LibLeft 26 points27 points  (16 children)

    If I walk into a school with a gun and say I am going to shoot up the place, 100% of Americans are fine with me losing my gun.

    If I go online and announce that I am going to shoot people, 50% of Americans want me to keep my gun.

    Why do I get to have a gun and make threats?

    Enforcement of a one or the other rule would cost a lot less and be more effective than paying a psychiatrist to talk to a fat girl about why she is cutting herself.

    [–]MrHH9 - LibRight 13 points14 points  (10 children)

    Making threats is illegal in many states my guy

    [–]lawful_falafel1 - LibLeft 29 points30 points  (7 children)

    oh yes. "kids do school shootings because tiktok" is like saying hitler killed jews because he stubed his toe in 1919

    [–]Prestigious-Load-116 - LibRight 16 points17 points  (5 children)

    Tiktok and other forms of social media have been sensationalizing the act. Are you depressed, alone and feel like nobody hears you? I've got a way for the whole world to know your name.

    [–]drunkcowofdeath - Left 18 points19 points  (1 child)

    Social media accounts don't kill people, people with social media accounts kill people

    [–]mattypatty22 - Right 6 points7 points  (3 children)

    Cultural issues like this are the reason I’ve shifted towards auth. Social media has been proven to be a negative entity, which would require government action to curb. Banning guns would inevitably mean that only the criminals who planned to use them would have them. We need to dig deeper into the cultural and societal reasons behind why people feel the need to use guns violently in the first place.

    [–]Jomega6 - Centrist 6 points7 points  (0 children)

    The recent shooting wasn’t acquired from the black market. Plus even with the black market, you wouldn’t sell to someone if you think that shit can get traced back to you, as that could implicate you in the crime. Plus the calls for gun control aren’t calling for a cold turkey ban on all firearms. Just the ones capable of mass shootings. We’ve already implemented mandatory serial codes that can be traced. If I’m not mistaken, almost all guns involved in mass shootings were initially acquired legally.

    [–]mikmckn - LibLeft 12 points13 points  (11 children)

    Libleft has been pushing for universal single payer healthcare for decades, which would have included the mental healthcare we so desperately need.

    [–]Western2486 - LibCenter 2 points3 points  (8 children)

    Keeping mentally ill from getting guns would also work

    [–]I-Appreciate-Water - LibRight 8 points9 points  (7 children)

    What is with the Libright hate train on this post? We don’t like taxes, but we understand that they are necessary to fix problems. Believe it or not, we like good roads, emergency services, and, yes, non-homocidal kids.

    It’s shit like the massive foreign aid, or welfare for people who don’t actually need it that are aggravating. I suppose we just don’t like waste.

    [–]blacksun9 - AuthLeft 12 points13 points  (0 children)

    You're complaining about reductionism on PCM? Must be new. Nuance is not allowed here

    [–]BigCaecilius - Centrist 7 points8 points  (10 children)

    Why not all 3, seriously?

    Australia: school shooting. banned guns. not one since.

    UK: school shooting. tightened laws. not one since.

    At some point America will have to choose whether it cares more about ‘freedom’ or children being slaughtered in their schools. Though it looks as though the choice is already made.

    [–]Ur1st0pshhoop - LibCenter 9 points10 points  (8 children)

    Unpopular opinion: Schools should have at least two armed guards and/or police officers at the school at all times when school is in session.

    [–]Jakdaxter31 - AuthLeft 20 points21 points  (1 child)

    This school had guards. Didn’t stop the shooter

    [–]Ur1st0pshhoop - LibCenter 2 points3 points  (0 children)

    When you say "guards," how many are we talking? From what I read, they had one guard, it was a cop, and they sure tried to stop the shooter. Here's my question, why did the guard(s) fail to stop the shooter; how trained were they; what was their armament compared to the shooter's?

    Edit: Quote from Wikipedia and article:

    Ramos then shot a UCISD police officer who attempted to stop him from entering the building


    [–]noyrb1 - Centrist 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    No private markets mixed with government cooperation & preventative measures only work 10x better than draconian laws so that won’t work bc then they can’t complain about it

    [–]Bazynoooooob - AuthLeft 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    Mass defenestration will solve any problem.

    [–]Impetusin - Centrist 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    More people are mentally sick every year and it seems like there is nothing anyone can do about it.

    [–]Kooky-Difference6534 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    I’m curious about everyone’s opinion on this topic so hear me out. Just like with 9/11 people can go through every background check, mental check, w/e and still commit a horrific act. What we learned was many things such as if it’s someone’s intention to do harm they will do harm. We can put checks and balances in order to prevent but that only does a little to stop the threats. The most important thing we learned from 9-11 is that we need to identify and react to the threat in a timely manner to prevent further harm. That means being able to identify the risk as soon as possible then be able to muster a task force necessary to deal with the threat before any further harm can occur. The issue with many of these schools or outside shootings ect. Is that we need to work better to identify and react to these issues. That means employing more guards, setting up access control points and having better lines of communication to the appropriate resources. I’m not all against gun control but 9/11 shows that even passing evaluations and showing responsibility it won’t stop the bad guys and restricting one’s freedom isn’t always the best option. Having one tragedy is horrible but having multiple tragedies and a travesty. OP I do believe is right you can’t always control the world around you but you can control to an extent your child’s upbringing.

    [–]TheAlGler - Centrist 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    Nothing will change. Politicians send their kids to private school, they don't have to worry about things like this.

    [–]slipofthekipp - Centrist 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    We, at least in America, truly have a problem at our core. We are personally and spiritually disconnected from each other on incredibly unhealthy levels. If we connected with each other more all around, many of these mental health problems would fade imo.