APA: Blaming mental illness for gun violence is 'simplistic, inaccurate'

The organization argues that there is no evidence for this claim.

Photo by Rux Centea on Unsplash
  • Two statements from APA officials make it clear that they don't see any substantial link between mental illness and gun violence.
  • Decades of studies show that there is no conclusive evidence to this knee jerk rhetoric.
  • Officials reiterate the argument that the easy access to guns is to blame.
Keep reading Show less
Pixabay
  • The studies, conducted by researchers at Boston University, compared the efficacy of different types of gun laws across the U.S.
  • The results showed that jurisdictions with a combination of laws that restrict who can buy guns experience relatively fewer gun-related deaths.
  • President Donald Trump recently expressed support for expanding federal gun background checks, though it's unclear whether the Senate will pass any such legislation.
Keep reading Show less

Malevolent creativity: When evil gets innovative

We like to think of creativity as an inherently good thing. History and science say otherwise.

Photo by Adam Fossier on Unsplash
  • Many of history's most cherished figures were fiercely creative individuals, but creativity by itself doesn't have a moral direction.
  • "Malevolent creativity" is the production of innovative and novel solutions with the express intent of harming others.
  • How does malevolent creativity arise, and how can we manage it?
Keep reading Show less

The incredible history of the 2nd Amendment and America’s gun violence problem

Gun safety laws have a historical precedent in the 1939 court case U.S. v Miller.

  • In 1765, the Britain Parliament passed a Stamp Act, but people in New England rebelled against it. In response to this, the king sent two regimens of the British army to Boston to occupy the city. They were much despised by Bostonians, and this occuptation led to the Boston Massacre in 1770. Since then, many have interpreted the Second Amendment to mean the right of the people to bear arms to aid them in a possible insurrection against the government.
  • The Supreme Court in 1939 in U.S. v Miller, decided unanimously that gun safety laws are perfectly constitutional — the justices declared that the Second Amendment does not protect the rights of an individual to carry firearms. They said the Second Amendment protects the right of people to form militias, or to participate in the common defense.
  • According to many historians, bearing arms evokes a military use for the common defense — not for shooting rabbits or for the insurrection against one's government. It seems the purpose of the law is to allow citizens to participate in defense of the country against a common enemy.
Keep reading Show less

The ‘warspeak’ permeating everyday language puts us all in the trenches

Warspeak has relentlessly crept into most aspects of American life and public discourse.

Fototeca Gilardi/Getty Images

In a manifesto posted online shortly before he went on to massacre 22 people at an El Paso Walmart, Patrick Crusius cited the “invasion" of Texas by Hispanics. In doing so, he echoed President Trump's rhetoric of an illegal immigrant “invasion."

Keep reading Show less