You want to honor them?
Where is the honor in getting killed for no reason by a complete stranger? What do you tell the parents on that podium? “This award is for the bravery your daughter showed when she took a bullet to the back of the head while talking to her friends. We are so proud of her and what she did.”
The OP’s idea could backfire if prospective gunmen whose families are in bad financial straits decide that going on a mass shooting spree is a good way to get them out of the hole. Shoot and injure your parents or other relatives (while wounding and killing some of the neighbors), and your relatives get a nice chunk of change in the form of survivors’ benefits.
Then we’d wind up essentially rewarding violent people for their actions, similar to families of Mideast terrorists receiving payments from their governments.*
*I’m unclear on whether the OP wants payments made only to victims of mass shootings, and whether bombings, stabbings etc. are also eligible crimes.
Oh, that’s what you were objecting to? I thought you were rejecting the notion that some shooters might reconsider.
I don’t personally compensation is that good an idea. I could even picture it being used to cover, or at least an effort to cover, murder for profit i.e. someone shoots up or hires someone to shoot up their spouse’s workplace, to kill the spouse and at least three bystanders, to qualify for the compensation.
Yeah, that was my thought as well, that someone would use this as a way to profit. Also, as many have pointed out, what exactly is the goal here? To punish the American people because they allow guns, to make the costs of such things felt (more than they already are considering we already have life insurance and health care that will cover at least some of the victims)? If it’s to help the families that need it, then maybe I could see some sort of life insurance thing and perhaps healthcare for those who aren’t covered…if you asked every Amerian to pay $1 a year into a collective health insurance fund you could cover the payouts to anyone who doesn’t have insurance and perhaps healthcare costs to anyone who doesn’t have insurance and was injured. Not sure what to do about the possibility of abuse.
No, they are not. The US has more gun violence all around that other, similar countries. But other, similar, countries do have mass shootings. Not just as common as here. Just as “regular” killings due to street violence is a lot more common in the US. It seems you are grasping at straws to justify this idea that you think will, somehow, make folks see things the way you do. But only someone who already sees things the way you do would agree that this is a good idea.
And mass KILLINGS are something that is pretty common across the globe. China has a real issue with mass stabbings, for instance. It’s just that mass shootings in the US really capture the attention of the media and are broadcast worldwide, often while they are still happening.
(post shortened, underline added)
In what way are they treated similarly?
What federal/state/personal benefits do you believe should be given to a mass murderer’s victims? Cards? Flowers? Memorial plaque? Statue? Purple Heart? VA rates on home loans? Allow a mass murders’ surviving victims to use Veterans Affairs hospitals? A disability pension for PTSD?
What is preventing you from recognizing/honoring/memorializing the victims of other/all mass murders? You only seem to be concerned with mass shootings. Mass murders are not limited to shootings. Shouldn’t the victims, and the families, of other types of mass murder also be recognized/honored/memorialized?
According to this link, the US has 31% of all mass shootings with only 5% of the population:
Depending on how “mass shootings” are defined, they occur at about 5 per year to as often as every two weeks or so:
From what I can find, this frequency really is uniquely American. Maybe you wouldn’t characterize it that way, but it seems entirely reasonable to me to do so.
Since the great majority (69%) of mass shootings happen outside the US, it is simply not true that mass shootings are uniquely American. Having so many mass shootings is uniquely American, as compared to other developed countries, but so is having so much street crime.
I don’t see how this corrects what iiandyiiii said. If anything, you’re agreeing.
That’s what I’m saying. Regular and frequent mass shootings are uniquely American.
Regular and frequent crime is not uniquely American, but regular and frequent mass shootings are.
His idea is that mass shootings are uniquely American and street crime is not. But in both cases it’s the amount, not the thing itself. So, if we’re going to canonize the victims of mass shootings, there is no reason not to do the same for victims of street violence.
It’s like dinner. Most folks, everywhere eat dinner. But Americans EAT DINNER!!!
The why behind this proposal is very obviously entirely subjective, so it’s fine if you disagree with the need for it.
I disagree with it because you are using the survivors as a prop for your campaign, and because it has a high probability of backfiring on you. You would be giving those that you oppose an out when you accuse them of doing nothing-they will take ownership of this idea to show that they are doing something.
…what exactly are these benefits and honors? Are you talking about things like medical expenses being paid, or are you talking about medals and a guaranteed plot at Arlington’s?
If its the former, then I think that should be a no-brainer. How can any society sit back and allow things like this to happen? The obvious solution of course is “Universal Health Care.” Not just looking after veterans and shooting victims: but everyone. But that’s a whole different thread. If you mean the latter: then no. There are civilian medals that are available for “acts of bravery” and survivors (and those who didn’t) should certainly be eligible for those.
It is? Perhaps I am missing something, but it looks like he was talking about mass shootings, and you want to talk about mass shootings and street crime, he is not currently interested in talking about street crime, so you are presenting his opinion on his behalf?
I’d certainly welcome those families’ opinion, and if most opposed it I wouldn’t be of favor of it. But what you call backfiring would actually be one of the goals - it would formally record (as much as can be done) that the United States recognizes that we, as a country, bear responsibility for the incredibly high frequency of mass shootings. ISTM that a huge portion of the country, including the government in power, denies this.
Proposal to do what, specifically?
It won’t record jack-it will either be called a grandstand play or be co-opted by gun rights activists like I said before, and as pointed out it will make those that didn’t die in that particular fashion second-class victims.
Okay, I disagree, for reasons already stated. I understand that you don’t find those reasons compelling. Thanks for taking part in this discussion.