Whenever there is a shooting like the one in Roseburg, Oregon there is an instinct by liberals in media to fall back on blaming both guns and a lack of access to mental health care.
Let’s take a look at the mental health care argument since it is often projected by rarely questioned. After all, who can really be against access to mental health care?
The problem with increasing access to mental health care is that it is voluntary and depends on the individual to essentially report himself as a potential problem.
This leads to a difficult question which is how do you get isolated individuals into therapy through their own accord? How do you get a narcissist into therapy?
The entire premise of better access to mental health care assumes that these individuals would have sought help if it were available. These are people that blame society and we are supposed to believe that they would have sought help from society if that help was available? Why?
I don’t doubt that therapy could have helped these individuals just as they could have been helped by having a good friend or being part of a healthier culture. But how do you get them to go?
But more importantly our colleges and schools already offering counseling services and we only know of one shooter that actually went and it obviously didn’t prevent him from killing.
America had guns before Psychology existed and yet mass classroom shootings were non-existent. Some might suggest that the guns were less deadly but even a pump-action shotgun can cause considerable damage in a classroom. But there simply isn’t a history of classroom shootings that correlates with the mere presence of guns.
Something changed in society that made these types of shootings an annual occurrence. We have to look at what changed even if it means asking difficult questions about culture and social values.