Anger management and guns

[MillCreek]

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/magazines/panache/nearly-10-of-americans-have-record-of-anger-and-access-to-guns-study/articleshow/46849997.cms

This ties in with my anecdotal opinion based on my healthcare experience, at least in terms of the percentages of people with anger management issues.

[Mannlicher]

yawn.  Just another anti gun article with little or no scientific facts, thrown out to prejudice folks against having guns in the house.  And really, quoting a source from INDIA?  Give me a break.        

[MillCreek]

http://news.health.com/2015/04/08/1-in-10-americans-has-anger-issues-and-access-to-guns-survey/

Here is the same press release, printed in American media, if that is more persuasive to you.

[brimic]

I wonder how much overlap there is between the groups of people who have anger management issues and people who are anti-gun because they are afraid of 'blood running in the street' because of people with anger issues solving their problems with guns.

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

I think a great deal of overlap


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Hawkmoon]

I've broken a few things in my life due to anger. (Including my big toe, from kicking a concrete block wall.) The notion of using a firearm against another human being due to MY anger has never even entered my consciousness.

Methinks there's a lot of assuming and generalizing in that article.

[vaskidmark]

I have no problem with the conclusions of the study - people who are both impulsive and unable to control angry emotion and have access to firearms are significantly more prone to use those firearms during an episode of impulsive acting out behavior.

In other words - Duh!

The study seems to suggest that those with anger and impulsivity control problems should be restricted from access to firearms - even if there is no history of prior misuse of firearms during an angry and impulsive episode.

What bothers me is that the study does not seem to address the various other inanimate objects that are used by impulsive and angry people to inflict death/serious bodily injury on others - chainsaws, baseball bats, shovels, hammers, frying pans, screwdrivers and probably the largest both in sheer size and number of times used - automobiles.  Yet controlling access to firearms is seen as a public health/public safety issue while control of access to any/all of the other inanimate objects is ignored.

The other problem I see is that, as seen in
 http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-8 -

a) there is no breakdown of what numbers were based on impulsivity/anger control issues and what numbers either premeditated or negligent

b) automobiles are not considered at all.

I'm not going to dispute the raw numbers (which the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg study does not report) but I do dispute the lack of consideration of other instrumentalities.

As for those with a documented prior history of anger/impulsivity control problems leading to violence by use of a firearm I note that most firearm-based assault crimes are categorized as felonies.  As such a conviction would make the person a prohibited possessor and thus no additional laws/regulations/actions are needed.  The study, however, seems to want to pre-emptively control access to firearms from all those with anger/impulsivity control issues who have had some sort of criminal justice contact - not just those who used a firearm.

Tell me why I'm nor surprised.

stay safe.

[Hawkmoon]

http://news.health.com/2015/04/08/1-in-10-americans-has-anger-issues-and-access-to-guns-survey/

Here is the same press release, printed in American media, if that is more persuasive to you.

Doesn't make it any more credible for me.

[MechAg94]

said Jeffrey Swanson, a professor in psychiatry and behavioral sciences at Duke University in North Carolina and lead author of the study.

"But now we have more evidence that current laws don't necessarily keep firearms out of the hands of a lot of potentially dangerous individuals," he wrote.

Really Sherlock?  What clued you in to that?  That is true for the dangerous criminals we know about, much less anyone else.  

[MechAg94]

We already have a system in place to identify people with anger/violence issues and peopel with judgement issues and restrict them from owning firearms.  We do that by identifying those people as "felons" and making it illegal for them to possess guns.  That doesn't really work well, but neither do prohibitions on anything else that people decide they really want. 

[MechAg94]

All that said, I would want to question exactly how they identified people with "anger management" issues.  I sense a potential for great error.

[MillCreek]

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bsl.2172/abstract

Here is the abstract of the source article.  As with most things academic, you have to pay to get the full article.

[BryanP]

People with anger management issues will find an outlet.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/manuel-delisle-pleads-not-guilty-after-quebec-road-rage-chainsaw-incident-1.3023552

[Perd Hapley]

I've broken a few things in my life due to anger. (Including my big toe, from kicking a concrete block wall.) The notion of using a firearm against another human being due to MY anger has never even entered my consciousness.

This. Well, this-ish. No broken toes. I've done stupid things, due to fits of anger, and I was usually armed with at least a knife, often an M249 light machine gun. In the moment, drawing a weapon to hurt someone, or even threaten them, simply never occurred to me. If I was that kind of person, I'd probably have some felonies in my record by now, and not be allowed to have a firearm under current law.

[Hawkmoon]

If I was that kind of person, I'd probably have some felonies in my record by now, and not be allowed to have a firearm under current law.

Which, of course, would absolutely ensure that you wouldn't ever have a firearm ...

[K Frame]

Well-well look. I already told you: I deal with the god damn customers so the engineers don't have to. I have people skills; I am good at dealing with people. Can't you understand that? What the hell is wrong with you people?

[MechAg94]

I have people skills!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RAY27NU1Jog

You can always try destroying a printer.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fjsSr3z5nVk

[Perd Hapley]

Well, there's a presidential election coming up. Time to bring out that perennial bogeyman, the "angry white male."

Dis here be my shocked face.