|
Post by palealeman on Feb 14, 2018 16:11:07 GMT -5
Another school shooting, this time in a high school in Broward County, FL. Multiple injuries, some people killed (don't have exact numbers yet), shooter is custody. President sends his condolences and notes that no child should have to go through something like this (and, believe it or not, I agree with him). And yet we'll find out that the weapon was purchased legally, there was no prior indication of any sort of instability, the NRA will issue a few press releases condemning the shooter (but not much else), people on one side will scream for some sort of cont(rol of weapons, people on the other side will scream about the paramount importance of the 2nd Amendment, and after a day or two everyone will forget about this incident. Ho, hum -- back to Olympic coverage. Wonder where next week's shooting will be?
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Feb 14, 2018 19:16:11 GMT -5
Sort of hard to stop such things when no one has any idea how to.
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Feb 14, 2018 20:46:56 GMT -5
And when the most obvious solution is armed security guards, and is denounced and thrown out of consideration out of hand by the Left, who have set the conditions for all these shootings with their insanity, and persistent destruction of our society.
|
|
|
Post by aboutwell on Feb 15, 2018 0:08:57 GMT -5
You will never be able to stop such shootings... but you can limit the shooter's ability to fire the same gun so many times... students should be taught to rush the shooter in mass when such a shooting starts... yeah, the first ones are gonna be killed... but the rest of them will take him down...
The NRA was COMPLAINING just last week that gun sales were down... they said they have a President that they don't fear with regard to gun confiscation or more gun control... so sales go down... they did say when things like school shootings happen, gun sales go up...
87 school shootings since Trump was inaugurated...
|
|
|
Post by aboutwell on Feb 15, 2018 0:11:33 GMT -5
And when the most obvious solution is armed security guards, and is denounced and thrown out of consideration out of hand by the Left, who have set the conditions for all these shootings with their insanity, and persistent destruction of our society. No, Redleg... the Left supports security guards in the public schools... have for many years... retired vets... retired law enforcement officers... I am one of them... I would serve as one of them...
|
|
|
Post by kemmer on Feb 15, 2018 1:43:31 GMT -5
Guns have been around for centuries. Guns so easy to load and fire any idiot can use one have been around for more than a century. School shootings have not. This is clearly a societal problem unrelated to hardware.
I have two suggestions.
First, bring back cussing. It's a fine way to relieve stress when life overwhelms us. Teens with antisocial/alienated "angsty" feelings used to scrawl the F-word on a wall and feel better. Now, when it can be heard at the formal presentation of the Oscars, it just has no shock value. (Are there any cuss words, anymore? How did we decide using the F-word in public was a mark of sophistication? Seriously? Talking like a redneck in a biker bar is suddenly proof of intellectual superiority?) We really do need some words used only in extreme circumstances. Without them, anger must escalate to fisticuffs-- or murder.
Second-- and this is just as difficult to accomplish-- we need to rethink what is "bullying". I'm all in favor of not picking on the weak and helpless, but choosing not to be friends with someone is NOT bullying. In fact, a teen with whom nobody wishes to associate (or the parents of a teen who has no friends) must consider there might be a reason for that wariness. Just because other people don't like you, doesn't mean you are a "victim". Note the cases in which the lawyer for the shooter first mouths: "He was bullied," as though that was a justification. No, it's not. In some cases, it just means other people saw something very wrong with him, and chose to avoid him whenever possible.
When the person (the supposed "victim") ends up shooting a bunch of random people, one can understand why nobody much wanted to sit at the lunchtable with him.
Those are my two thoughts. Any other suggestions?
|
|
|
Post by aboutwell on Feb 15, 2018 7:57:51 GMT -5
Limit sales of new weapons that shoot over 3-5 times without reloading... ban ALL high-powered rifles... (we don't NEED 'em... we WANT them... I don't own one)... plenty of the old ones out there for people like this to use...
More security at the schools... limit access to the schools was much as possible... I have advocated this at least since Columbine shootings...
It is being reported that over 65 school districts in Florida have requested additional funds to beef up security at the schools... those requests have been denied now for at least 7 years...
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Feb 15, 2018 10:59:32 GMT -5
You will never be able to stop such shootings... but you can limit the shooter's ability to fire the same gun so many times... students should be taught to rush the shooter in mass when such a shooting starts... yeah, the first ones are gonna be killed... but the rest of them will take him down... The NRA was COMPLAINING just last week that gun sales were down... they said they have a President that they don't fear with regard to gun confiscation or more gun control... so sales go down... they did say when things like school shootings happen, gun sales go up... 87 school shootings since Trump was inaugurated... So, we have had Democrats and other Leftists preaching entitlement, fake 'progress', "safe spaces", and no discipline, for decades. We have pop culture glorifying criminals and dirt bags, rap and culture telling kids "if you are disrespected, you can kill someone", and you've removed all moral imperatives from public life, and you want to blame firearms? Kids have had much more access to firearms for the entire history of this country. When I was a kid, I could buy a rifle from the local hardware store, no questions asked. Kids have often used firearms to help feed their families since the Founding. Yet, this sort of abomination wasn't happening. Why not? It's because human life was valued. Today, we see the Party of the KKK, whose only platform is the destruction of human life in the womb, and who learn only "me, I'm important, you aren't" all their lives. In addition, we have schools using psychotropic drugs on younger and younger kids, mainly boys, because they are "disruptive" and teachers and administrators would rather have zombies than actual kids. Notice that nearly every non terrorist shooting like this has been committed by males that were on Ritalin, or some other psychotropic drug, and quit taking it. Firearms aren't the problem, culture is.
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Feb 15, 2018 11:00:19 GMT -5
And when the most obvious solution is armed security guards, and is denounced and thrown out of consideration out of hand by the Left, who have set the conditions for all these shootings with their insanity, and persistent destruction of our society. No, Redleg... the Left supports security guards in the public schools... have for many years... retired vets... retired law enforcement officers... I am one of them... I would serve as one of them... Then why do the Party of the KKK "leaders" shout it down nearly everywhere it's brought up?
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Feb 15, 2018 11:08:37 GMT -5
Limit sales of new weapons that shoot over 3-5 times without reloading... ban ALL high-powered rifles... (we don't NEED 'em... we WANT them... I don't own one)... plenty of the old ones out there for people like this to use... More security at the schools... limit access to the schools was much as possible... I have advocated this at least since Columbine shootings... It is being reported that over 65 school districts in Florida have requested additional funds to beef up security at the schools... those requests have been denied now for at least 7 years... First, define "high powered". Do you mean anything over .22 Long Rifle? Second, you are pissing in the wind. When our government is selling "high powered" and semi automatic firearms to Mexican drug cartels, and those same firearms are showing up in the black market in cities like B'more, NY, and Chicago, how, exactly, do you suggest "limiting" them? Third, the AR platform is not a "high powered" rifle. Not in original form. The 5.56 is, at best, a medium powered round. It was developed for varmint shooting. That means woodchucks, prairie dogs, up to coyotes. It's main advantage is high velocity, low bullet weight, and accuracy. It's not a great round for combat, even though it's used there now. For military use, it's advantages are low recoil, so smaller males and females are not intimidated by the recoil, more ammo for less weight, and less danger to noncombatants because it doesn't penetrate walls, or vehicles as effectively as larger, more powerful rounds. So, where do you suggest we draw the line on "powerful"? None of the mass shooters have used a .308, although the Aurora shooter used a shotgun, so should we ban shotguns now? After all, we don't need them.
|
|
|
Post by aboutwell on Feb 15, 2018 14:16:53 GMT -5
You will never be able to stop such shootings... but you can limit the shooter's ability to fire the same gun so many times... students should be taught to rush the shooter in mass when such a shooting starts... yeah, the first ones are gonna be killed... but the rest of them will take him down... The NRA was COMPLAINING just last week that gun sales were down... they said they have a President that they don't fear with regard to gun confiscation or more gun control... so sales go down... they did say when things like school shootings happen, gun sales go up... 87 school shootings since Trump was inaugurated... So, we have had Democrats and other Leftists preaching entitlement, fake 'progress', "safe spaces", and no discipline, for decades. We have pop culture glorifying criminals and dirt bags, rap and culture telling kids "if you are disrespected, you can kill someone", and you've removed all moral imperatives from public life, and you want to blame firearms? Kids have had much more access to firearms for the entire history of this country. When I was a kid, I could buy a rifle from the local hardware store, no questions asked. Kids have often used firearms to help feed their families since the Founding. Yet, this sort of abomination wasn't happening. Why not? It's because human life was valued. Today, we see the Party of the KKK, whose only platform is the destruction of human life in the womb, and who learn only "me, I'm important, you aren't" all their lives. In addition, we have schools using psychotropic drugs on younger and younger kids, mainly boys, because they are "disruptive" and teachers and administrators would rather have zombies than actual kids. Notice that nearly every non terrorist shooting like this has been committed by males that were on Ritalin, or some other psychotropic drug, and quit taking it. Firearms aren't the problem, culture is. I agree that culture is the problem... firearms is just the means they use... work on both ends... change the culture... but limit the means in the meantime...
|
|
|
Post by aboutwell on Feb 15, 2018 14:17:56 GMT -5
No, Redleg... the Left supports security guards in the public schools... have for many years... retired vets... retired law enforcement officers... I am one of them... I would serve as one of them... Then why do the Party of the KKK "leaders" shout it down nearly everywhere it's brought up? Haven't seen or heard that...
|
|
|
Post by aboutwell on Feb 15, 2018 14:31:00 GMT -5
Limit sales of new weapons that shoot over 3-5 times without reloading... ban ALL high-powered rifles... (we don't NEED 'em... we WANT them... I don't own one)... plenty of the old ones out there for people like this to use... More security at the schools... limit access to the schools was much as possible... I have advocated this at least since Columbine shootings... It is being reported that over 65 school districts in Florida have requested additional funds to beef up security at the schools... those requests have been denied now for at least 7 years... First, define "high powered". Do you mean anything over .22 Long Rifle? Second, you are pissing in the wind. When our government is selling "high powered" and semi automatic firearms to Mexican drug cartels, and those same firearms are showing up in the black market in cities like B'more, NY, and Chicago, how, exactly, do you suggest "limiting" them? Third, the AR platform is not a "high powered" rifle. Not in original form. The 5.56 is, at best, a medium powered round. It was developed for varmint shooting. That means woodchucks, prairie dogs, up to coyotes. It's main advantage is high velocity, low bullet weight, and accuracy. It's not a great round for combat, even though it's used there now. For military use, it's advantages are low recoil, so smaller males and females are not intimidated by the recoil, more ammo for less weight, and less danger to noncombatants because it doesn't penetrate walls, or vehicles as effectively as larger, more powerful rounds. So, where do you suggest we draw the line on "powerful"? None of the mass shooters have used a .308, although the Aurora shooter used a shotgun, so should we ban shotguns now? After all, we don't need them. "High powered" in this instance is "my" definition and follows "my"description of a non-high-powered rifle... a .22 long rifle can be considered a high-powered round because of it's muzzle velocity... I see no reason to have a gun that shoots over 3-5 times... (if you can't get your game or perp in that number... you need additional training)... or has the capability to kill a large animal... (such rifles should require special arrangements or permits and be registered)... LIMIT the capability with whatever the weapon is that the shooter has... that's a start... and screen for mental illness when selling a weapon... Obama had such a program... Trump cancelled it... Australia made sweeping gun control measures after a man killed 35 people with a semi-automatic weapon in a popular tourist area of Port Arthur, in Tasmania... weeks after the April 1996 tragedy, the country and its states began banning rapid-fire guns to tamp down on mass shootings and then offered to buy the prohibited firearms... Research suggests it's worked...
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Feb 15, 2018 14:50:12 GMT -5
So, we have had Democrats and other Leftists preaching entitlement, fake 'progress', "safe spaces", and no discipline, for decades. We have pop culture glorifying criminals and dirt bags, rap and culture telling kids "if you are disrespected, you can kill someone", and you've removed all moral imperatives from public life, and you want to blame firearms? Kids have had much more access to firearms for the entire history of this country. When I was a kid, I could buy a rifle from the local hardware store, no questions asked. Kids have often used firearms to help feed their families since the Founding. Yet, this sort of abomination wasn't happening. Why not? It's because human life was valued. Today, we see the Party of the KKK, whose only platform is the destruction of human life in the womb, and who learn only "me, I'm important, you aren't" all their lives. In addition, we have schools using psychotropic drugs on younger and younger kids, mainly boys, because they are "disruptive" and teachers and administrators would rather have zombies than actual kids. Notice that nearly every non terrorist shooting like this has been committed by males that were on Ritalin, or some other psychotropic drug, and quit taking it. Firearms aren't the problem, culture is. I agree that culture is the problem... firearms is just the means they use... work on both ends... change the culture... but limit the means in the meantime... Limit how? From the early reports, this guy, just like the last 3, bought his firearms "legally". So, how, exactly do you suggest limiting it? Not to mention that, if they don't get them 'legally', they will buy on the black market, or steal them. Remember the New Town shooter? He murdered his mother to get his. And again, when the Federal government is selling firearms to Mexican drug cartels, then allowing them free access to the US, what's to stop them from selling the firearms to anyone that wants one? If you could limit firearms, what's to stop the insane from simply using bombs? Sarin? Phosgene? All are pretty easy to make. Or cars? Pull the fire alarm, and when the kids are outside, run over them with a car? You can't stop insanity, or evil. All you can do is prepare yourself to fight back. Unfortunately, all we get is platitudes and stupidity from both the Left and RINOs. Nothing a one of htem has proposed would do a single thing to stop a single one of the shootings.
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Feb 15, 2018 14:50:42 GMT -5
Then why do the Party of the KKK "leaders" shout it down nearly everywhere it's brought up? Haven't seen or heard that... Then you haven't been listening.
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Feb 15, 2018 14:55:52 GMT -5
First, define "high powered". Do you mean anything over .22 Long Rifle? Second, you are pissing in the wind. When our government is selling "high powered" and semi automatic firearms to Mexican drug cartels, and those same firearms are showing up in the black market in cities like B'more, NY, and Chicago, how, exactly, do you suggest "limiting" them? Third, the AR platform is not a "high powered" rifle. Not in original form. The 5.56 is, at best, a medium powered round. It was developed for varmint shooting. That means woodchucks, prairie dogs, up to coyotes. It's main advantage is high velocity, low bullet weight, and accuracy. It's not a great round for combat, even though it's used there now. For military use, it's advantages are low recoil, so smaller males and females are not intimidated by the recoil, more ammo for less weight, and less danger to noncombatants because it doesn't penetrate walls, or vehicles as effectively as larger, more powerful rounds. So, where do you suggest we draw the line on "powerful"? None of the mass shooters have used a .308, although the Aurora shooter used a shotgun, so should we ban shotguns now? After all, we don't need them. "High powered" in this instance is "my" definition and follows "my"description of a non-high-powered rifle... a .22 long rifle can be considered a high-powered round because of it's muzzle velocity... I see no reason to have a gun that shoots over 3-5 times... (if you can't get your game or perp in that number... you need additional training)... or has the capability to kill a large animal... (such rifles should require special arrangements or permits and be registered)... LIMIT the capability with whatever the weapon is that the shooter has... that's a start... and screen for mental illness when selling a weapon... Obama had such a program... Trump cancelled it... Australia made sweeping gun control measures after a man killed 35 people with a semi-automatic weapon in a popular tourist area of Port Arthur, in Tasmania... weeks after the April 1996 tragedy, the country and its states began banning rapid-fire guns to tamp down on mass shootings and then offered to buy the prohibited firearms... Research suggests it's worked... You have obviously never been in a real situation. It's not even close to how they portray it in the movies, or on TV. Police, that are allegedly very highly trained, might have to fire 100 rounds or more to get 2 or 3 hits in a real situation. No, The Puppet didn't have such a program to screen for mental illness. What he did was set the SSA bureacrats as arbitrators of mental illness, based on the elderly needing help with finances. No review by a trained psychiatrist, no due process, just some flunky in a cubicle. Trump stopped that. Australia also is an island, with no contiguous borders with anyone. And they are having a gun crime wave. It didn't "work", it just enabled the criminals to do what they wanted either with or without firearms. We are not Australia. As for your high powered firearm suggestion, let's start with the police, and see how that works out. After all, if "we don't need them", then neither do the police.
|
|
|
Post by palealeman on Feb 15, 2018 19:37:29 GMT -5
Sort of hard to stop such things when no one has any idea how to. Exactly the sort of answer I expected from an unthinking partisan, RJ. There have been recent discussions of just this same issue -- probably after the last school shooting, or the one before that -- and, whenever a possible solution is discussed, you shoot it down. There are many possible suggestions/solutions to this issue. I'll list several. Note that I take no position on any of these -- I list them for discussion, probably with some overlap of what's been discussed already. (1) The ultimate radical solution -- repeal the 2nd Amendment. (Comment: probably never happen, but it is a possible solution). (2) Put armed security in schools. (Comment: a really horrible idea. Security in the Florida school yesterday was not aware of anything and did not respond. This suggestion would turn schools into armed camps and probably make students feel more afraid than safe. More guns is not the solution). (3) Arm teachers. (4) More stringent background, something that a large majority of the country supports. Don't issue any weapon until the background check is complete. Require this for any purchase of a weapon, both rifle and handgun. (5) License people before they can purchase a rifle or handgun. We license before people can drive cars. Guns are more deadly. License everyone, renew regularly (every 5 or so years), require background checks at initial issue and at renewals. (6) Like driver's licenses, require a minimum age before a person can buy a weapon. (7) Outlaw assault weapons. Outlaw semi-automatic weapons. Outlaw magazines that hold more than 5 or 10 rounds (or outlaw magazines completely). (8) More stringent mental health screening. This would tie in with background investigations. Not sure how this would work, but it's something that needs to be looked into. Unpopular suggestions? Of course. But we live in one of the most violent countries in the world. And most of our violence is related to firearms. Get in an argument in a British pub, you'll get beat up. Get into an argument in an American bar, you might be shot. We need to do something to curb the gun violence in our society. We need to do something to curb the gun violence in our culture -- not just in schools, but throughout the country. We've had, what, 15 school shootings this year? 80 some in the last five years? And over 200 mass shootings just this year alone? This level of shootings is unacceptable to most people. (5)
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Feb 15, 2018 20:29:25 GMT -5
Sort of hard to stop such things when no one has any idea how to. Exactly the sort of answer I expected from an unthinking partisan, RJ. There have been recent discussions of just this same issue -- probably after the last school shooting, or the one before that -- and, whenever a possible solution is discussed, you shoot it down. And this is exactly the sort of silliness we've all come to expect from the left. Someone shoots up a school, or a club, or a concert, or a Christmas Party, and the Democrats come out of the woodwork all screaming "DO SOMETHING!" but refuse to actually propose a solution that is either realistic, or that would actually prevent the mass shooting Repeal any law you want, it won't get rid of the 300 million + guns in the US. All this accomplishes is creating criminals where none currently exist. This might be the second best option you offer. Not that I want schools to become armed camps, but it will also promote homeschooling and get more kids away from crackpot liberalism masquerading as knowledge. Not especially opposed to this either, except at some point a gun will end up in the hands of an irresponsible lunatic like Ward Churchill or Melissa Click This is nonsense. Background checks are already pretty thorough. People get through the cracks because the government often does a really crappy job of reporting criminality to the proper places. Maybe holding the bureaucrats responsible for not reporting disqualifying events will fix this, but until that happens, additional background checks simply will not put a dent in this problem. Its close, but traffic deaths still outnumber gun deaths. www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/injury.htm. Most firearms deaths, however, are suicides. Either way though, this won't prevent criminals from obtaining guns. Either through thefts or the black market or straw purchases, people who want a gun will still be able to get a gun. I'd love to see a crackdown on straw purchasing. Throwing gang-bagers grandmother's, or their abused girlfriends in prison for 20 or so years will look real good, won't it? Already on the books. You have to be 18 to purchase a gun. www.atf.gov/firearms/qa/does-customer-have-be-certain-age-buy-firearms-or-ammunition-licenseeBeen there, done that, didn't work. I'm sure it would work just as well as medical marijuana laws do. Shrinks will be out there offering clearances for cash. Yes, I get it. DO SOMETHING! No matter how ineffective, counter productive or stupid it is, what this situation absolutely requires a really stupid and futile gesture be done on somebody's part. I prefer ideas that would actually accomplish something rather than your Animal House approach to this problem.
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Feb 16, 2018 7:18:57 GMT -5
As information is coming out, we're learning Cruz has a mental health history that probably should have been reported, yet wasn't.
He apparently bought the gun legally after passing a background check.
Tightening background checks isn't going to fix this if the people responsible for reporting mental illness like this fail to do so.
|
|
|
Post by aboutwell on Feb 16, 2018 9:18:14 GMT -5
Nothing is going to work unless those responsible do their jobs... and stop the dealing under the table... just like the welfare system...
|
|
|
Post by palealeman on Feb 16, 2018 10:25:21 GMT -5
Thank you, RJ, for proving my point. Note that I listed several items and clearly stated that I endorse none of them (though I did make a couple of comments). In your continued unthinking partisanship, you regurgitate NRA talking points that nothing can be done to stop the constant shootings in our country -- not just the all-too-numerous school shootings, but the overall level of shootings and deaths.
With an attitude like that, with an attitude like President Trump shows, with an attitude like most conservatives show, it's no wonder that nothing ever gets done and the violence continues.
Thank you for your continuing indifference to this serious problem.
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Feb 16, 2018 10:26:54 GMT -5
Sort of hard to stop such things when no one has any idea how to. Exactly the sort of answer I expected from an unthinking partisan, RJ. There have been recent discussions of just this same issue -- probably after the last school shooting, or the one before that -- and, whenever a possible solution is discussed, you shoot it down. There are many possible suggestions/solutions to this issue. I'll list several. Note that I take no position on any of these -- I list them for discussion, probably with some overlap of what's been discussed already. Of course. Since you worship the government, and require a keeper, you think the government should be the only one that has force. That way, you and your owners can compel, through threat of death, whatever your masters demand. Repeal the 1A as well, since Leftist propaganda is far more responsible for school shootings than the actual firearm. After all, a firearm is just a tool. If it wasn't available, bombs, gas, cars, even hammers would be used. Ah, yes. Since shooters are only stopped by armed police, let's not have the police, or armed guards available on site. Let's sacrifice as many kids as possible, because it supports the Leftist's talking points. A possibility, however there are problems. First, just because one is trained with firearms doesn't mean they have the mental requirements to fire on another person. Second, when the police do arrive, they don't know the situation, who is doing the shooting, and if there are armed teachers, there might be 'friendly fire' incidents because the police mistake the teacher for the shooter. Worth thinking about, however. Again, why not require that for voting, exercising 1A rights, or for any other right enumerated in the Constitution? What, exactly, would more background checks achieve? This kid, evidently, followed all the regs for buying his firearm legally. So, what would more background checks achieve, other than burdening everyone that wanted a firearm even more than they already are? The Texas shooter also passed his background check, because your sainted government didn't do their job and notify the system that he was prohibited. Another case of your sainted Feds screwing things up, and people paying the price. Besides, since you never leave your basement, you don't know that that is already the law. Every legal firearms purchase, that goes through a dealer, must have a background check. Once again, shall we do that for voting? Or all other enumerated rights? If not, why not? If you can give the government absolute control over one enumerated right, how long before all are subject to permission from Washington for all? There is no right to drive a car, and cars kill far more people every year than firearms do. Except in firearms banned Chicago. Already a law. One can't purchase a long arm under 18, or a handgun under 21. Already a law. No new "assault weapons" can be purchased civilians if they were manufactured after, I think it was 1989. Since you have no idea what a firearm is or does, other than your video games and stupid movies, none of the firearms used in any of the shootings were "assault weapons". Let's say your scheme works, and all semi auto firearms are 'outlawed'. How, exactly, do you expect to confiscate all the hundreds of millions of them already in service? Door to door? Put out a memo telling all owners to surrender them? And like "1984", the sheep would all simply do what they are told? How about outlawing all video games that celebrate violence and criminal activity? How about outlawing all demands to "celebrate" sexual deviancy? How about outlawing all Leftist propaganda? Those are far more responsible than inanimate objects. Your owners have already destroyed that option, because they are calling the President mentally ill. They have tipped their hands, that they want to use it just as the Soviet Union did, to punish and silence any and all dissent. It wouldn't be longer than the next Party of the KKK regime before every kid in school had to have a "mental health" exam, and any that didn't exhibit the "proper" mental illness would be drugged into oblivion, or sent to a sanitarium, for "rehabilitation". Not to mention that HIPPA would prohibit the dispersion of the results of any mental health exam to the government. Unless you suggest that, unlike medical, all mental health info should be published. Or stabbed, or hit with a chair, or a walking stick. And no, we aren't "one of the most violent countries". Nearly half of the firearms deaths are suicides. Japan prohibits firearms ownership, and has the highest suicide rate in the world, so prohibiting firearms wouldn't stop that. Most of the rest are the direct result of Party of the KKK policies that encourage gang violence, out of wedlock births that leave young men with no fathers, welfare, lousy and violent schools, and no hope for climbing out of the cesspools that the Party of the KKK have created. But we shouldn't talk about that, because that would be "RAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACIST" or something. 200? I would like to see your source for that. And most of the "gun violence" is a result of gangs and drugs. Both a direct result of Party of the KKK policies. So is the total lack of discipline in our schools, and in most homes. Because of Democrat policies, over 70% of black babies are born out of wedlock, and that means young men have no fathers to teach them. So, the first thing we need to do is outlaw Leftists. Not to the Party of the KKK. They want as many as possible, because they can't push their Communist agenda through without bloodshed to scare the sheep into surrendering their rights and liberties. As evidenced by Party of the KKK commissars calling for "gun control" before the shooting even stopped. (5)
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Feb 16, 2018 10:31:25 GMT -5
As information is coming out, we're learning Cruz has a mental health history that probably should have been reported, yet wasn't. He apparently bought the gun legally after passing a background check. Tightening background checks isn't going to fix this if the people responsible for reporting mental illness like this fail to do so. The problem is, he was never adjudicated as mentally ill. I'm against police deciding that someone is mentally ill enough to deprive them of their enumerated rights, but they could have the authority to refer someone to a psychologist, under tightly controlled circumstances. However, even that is a scary thought, given the abuse law enforcement has shown at the top of the chain in the "Russian collusion" farce. How long before the police are used to refer people that oppose a particular politician or policy?
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Feb 16, 2018 10:34:08 GMT -5
Nothing is going to work unless those responsible do their jobs... and stop the dealing under the table... just like the welfare system... That won't happen until we start prosecuting those that abuse their positions, or simply don't do their jobs. Just like the farce that is happening in Washington right now, there are at least a dozen people in the FBI, CIA, DOJ, and DNC that should be facing prosecution, but they won't, because they are "above the law". When the top of the food chain in law enforcement is corrupt, and untouchable because of their positions, why should the little fish be punished?
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Feb 16, 2018 10:37:00 GMT -5
Thank you, RJ, for proving my point. Note that I listed several items and clearly stated that I endorse none of them (though I did make a couple of comments). In your continued unthinking partisanship, you regurgitate NRA talking points that nothing can be done to stop the constant shootings in our country -- not just the all-too-numerous school shootings, but the overall level of shootings and deaths. With an attitude like that, with an attitude like President Trump shows, with an attitude like most conservatives show, it's no wonder that nothing ever gets done and the violence continues. Thank you for your continuing indifference to this serious problem. Nothing you suggested would stop a single shooting. With the Party of the KKK importing as many illegal Democrats as possible, many of them gang bangers, terrorists, or drug dealers, the gang violence, which is most of the "gun" violence, won't abate. With the Federal government arming Mexican drug cartels under Democrat regimes, and those firearms being smuggled into the country, how exactly, do you suggest we 'ban all semi auto' firearms? Or are you content with only illegals and drug gangs being armed?
|
|