经济与社会科学2022ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
精神疾病、大规模枪击与美国枪支政治
Mental illness, mass shootings, and the politics of American firearms (2015)
入门 · 约 45 分钟读完前置知识：美国枪支政治背景、公共卫生与暴力研究基础概念
导读
这篇 2015 年的论文探讨美国大规模枪击事件与精神疾病之间的关系，以及'精神疾病'叙事在美国枪支政治中的作用。文章指出将枪击暴力归咎于精神疾病是一种政治化的话语，可能掩盖枪支可及性等更直接的因素。
HN 关注点：大规模枪击事件后，'精神疾病还是枪支管控'是美国社会反复争论的焦点，HN 读者围绕枪支政策、媒体效应和归因问题展开讨论。
HN 评论精选
这几条评论里：支持 1 质疑 1 补充 2
支持枪支放大了人的不负责任和冲动，美国应基于实证证据立法控枪
是时候基于实证证据而非崇高理想来立法了。如果人人都负责任，人人持枪或许没问题，但太多人极不负责任，而枪支让这种不负责任变得致命。人们本应安全存放枪支，但做不到，枪支被偷走非法出售，或被自家青少年使用。人们本不该在生命不受威胁时把枪指向别人，但他们做了，导致意外枪击或路怒升级为命案。更别提自杀了——家里有枪的话，自杀念头可能在 30 秒内变成行动，而且看起来像一种无痛、轻松的方式。当人人持枪时，人人都想持枪：警察因害怕持枪罪犯而迅速拔枪，普通人觉得别人都有枪、自己不买就不安全。我在美国以外长大，从没见过枪，也不认识任何有枪的人。枪不是唯一的杀人方式，但它是一种特别有效、直观、容易的方式。
librish查看英文原文
It's time we start legislating based on empirical evidence instead of lofty ideals. Yes, if everyone was responsible perhaps it would be OK for all of us to own firearms. But so many people are utterly irresponsible, and guns make that irresponsibility lethal. People should safely store their fire-arms, but they don't and guns get stolen and sold illegally, or used by their teenage child. People shouldn't point a gun at someone unless their life is in danger and they're prepared to take a life, but they do and people get shot by accident, or road rage turns deadly. Not to mention the suicides. If you own a gun ideation can turn into action in less than 30 seconds and it can seem like a painless, easy way to go. And when everyone is armed everyone wants to be armed. Cops pull their guns quickly out of fear of armed criminals. Regular people want to own a gun because they feel like everyone else does, and they're now less safe unless they also get one. Growing up outside the US I never saw any guns. I don't know of anyone who had a gun. I don't know of anyone who knew anyone who had a gun. I remember seeing military members in parades carrying guns because it was one of the few times I'd actually seen one. Cops didn't walk around armed. There are other ways to kill people but guns are an especially effective, intuitive, and easy way to do so.
补充媒体对枪击案的高调报道在'游戏化'暴力，应延迟发布凶手信息
我认为大家都能同意的第一步是：停止把枪击'游戏化'。过去十年几乎每起大规模枪击都是有人在追求媒体关注和'高分'，然而每次枪击后媒体都会详细报道凶手生平并清点死亡人数。一个简单的做法是对社区外的人实施一个月的信息封锁，等公众目光转移后再发布，这可能效果显著。
BobbyJo查看英文原文
I think a good first step everyone can agree on to stop gun violence is: stop it's gamification. Almost every mass shooting in the last decade was someone looking for media attention and high score. And yet, every shooting is followed by detailed biography and a tally of bodies. Something as simple as a one month moratorium on information for anyone outside the community would probably work wonders, as the public eye will have moved on by then.
质疑枪支是放大器而非根因，应同时重视霸凌和青少年心理健康问题
为什么不成立一个专门委员会认真调查（身体、社交、网络等）霸凌问题，而不是无视它？我们可以既推进严格的枪支法律，也更认真地对待儿童和青少年的心理健康。这类犯罪的作案者有明显的群体特征，用这一小部分持枪者来制定全社会的枪支政策将是激烈的政治争议。我个人希望未来枪支持有受到极严格控制，但声称持枪是这类事件的根本原因让我不认同——枪支确实放大了伤害规模，但大多数作案者并不是某天早上随机醒来就决定制造浩劫的。
twayt查看英文原文
How about having a mandatory committee that seriously investigates {physical, social, cyber, etc.}-bullying more instead of just ignoring it? We can both work on stringent gun laws and take the mental health of children/teenagers more seriously. There is a clear pattern of which demographic of people consistently commit such crimes. Using this subset of gun owners to dictate gun ownership policies is going to be a hotly contested political issue and it is going to take a while to make progress on that. I personally would hope for a future where gun ownership is very very strictly controlled. However, to claim that gun ownership is the root cause of such incidents occurring doesn't sit right with me. Sure it amplifies the amount of damage that can be done but I don't think that most of these individuals randomly woke up and decided to cause mayhem.
补充枪支暴力是美国人的自主选择，外人无需再评论
作为外国人，我觉得每当这类新闻出现时再去寻求解释或期待什么反应，是没有什么意义的。很明显，这就是美国人想要的生活方式，这是他们的权利。
jonp888查看英文原文
As a foreigner, I do not see it as productive to seek any explanation or expect any reaction when yet another news story like this comes along. It's clear that this is the way Americans wish to live, and it is their perogative to do so.
相关资源
从这篇论文所有 HN 讨论帖的全部评论里整理出来的链接。
历次讨论
- 2022Hacker News 讨论帖280 分 · 1,678 评
同领域还值得读
一切的回报率，1870–2015
The Rate of Return on Everything, 1870–2015
利用1870–2015年多国的长期数据，估算股票、住房等各类资本的回报率，并将其与经济增长率进行比较。
经济与社会科学2019 · 487 分 · 260 评进阶 · 约 100 分钟编辑精选一切资产的回报率，1870–2015
The Rate of Return on Everything, 1870–2015
构建了 1870–2015 年 16 个国家的长周期资产回报数据集，覆盖股票、住房、政府债券和短期票据，系统比较各类资产的真实回报与波动性。
经济与社会科学2018 · 215 分 · 151 评进阶 · 约 120 分钟编辑精选一切资产的回报率，1870–2015（2019）
The Rate of Return on Everything, 1870–2015 (2019)
这篇发表于《经济学季刊》的论文构建了 1870–2015 年间 16 个主要发达国家的股票、债券、房地产等资产收益率的长周期数据库。
经济与社会科学2024 · 190 分 · 148 评进阶 · 约 80 分钟编辑精选想法是否越来越难找？
Are ideas getting harder to find?
探讨“想法是否越来越难找到”：通过衡量多个领域的“研究生产率”，发现维持相同的增长需要投入指数级增长的研究资源，即研究效率在持续下降。
经济与社会科学2016 · 182 分 · 106 评入门 · 约 60 分钟编辑精选比特币与区块链的经济极限
The Economic Limits of Bitcoin and the Blockchain
芝加哥大学 Eric Budish 的论文从经济学角度分析比特币与区块链的根本限制：核心论点是只要攻击网络（双花或砸盘做空）的收益超过挖矿成本，51% 算力攻击就有利可图，而挖矿…
经济与社会科学2018 · 176 分 · 37 评进阶 · 约 90 分钟编辑精选