Here we go again. More circumventing the 2nd by the Admin

originally posted by: intrepid

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: intrepid

THE TRAGEDIES ARE CAUSED BY THIS!!!! We wouldn't even be talking about this if it wasn't for these tragedies. Is the gun argument so weak that it can't deal with the fallout of this?

And yet the solution to all tragedies that happen in 'gun free zones' is to call the 'Good guys' with guns to deal with the bad guys with guns.

Gun regulations didn't stop Lanza, and they will never stop the 'psychos'.

Other than labeling all gun owners as 'mental cases'.

OK, do what then?

Start enforcing the CURRENT laws that are on the books to their MAXIMUM EXTENT!

We can all agree that felons committing repeat crimes is one of our bigger problems. Saying we need more/better laws to keep guns out of their hands is flat out silly. No new or current laws work that way. There are VERY harsh penalties for committing firearm related crimes. ENFORCE them!

This is why I keep saying the anti-gun crowd doesn't give a damn about fixing firearm related crimes and only want to hamper LAW ABIDING people. If we ENFORCE the CURRENT laws to their MAXIMUM extent, you would see repeat crimes drop substantially. Slapping the biggest offenders of gun related crimes on the wrist does nothing to deter this behavior.

ENOUGH!!




The personal back and forth will stop right now!!

If you can not discuss the issue without it, maybe think about taking a break?

how exactly do they plan on passsing a law that applies to a protected class? the mentally ill are a protected class and if hippa stays around no one has any right to know who is mentally ill. domestic abusers are no a protected class but the mentally ill are so how does the governemnt legally plan on passing a law that only applies to a minority group but not applying the law equally ,pretty sure that would be all kinds of illegal as far as consitution goes. i mean lets use other protected classes as an example .

would a law saying no guns for women be legal? i dont think so

how about a law saying no gays could own guns? dont see that flying either so why do they think they can apply it to another federally protected group?

i mean cant have laws saying blacks cant own guns(supreme court case law on this as well) so how to they expect to be able to legally disarm a protected class of individuals

another point ive seen a few other members point out is well how do you define mental illness? the DSM changes every year and covers a variety of illness i bet most members would not have assumed would have labled them as mentally ill

en.wikipedia.org...

another point is how do they get to know who is mentally ill? those are supposed to be confidential medical records,and if they try this any mentally ill people will go to ground and either not seek treatment due to stigma or fear of loosing their 2nd amendment rights or just not even attempt to get any kind of help for their mental illness .so if the admins goal is to cut people trying to get mental health services i see this law doing that spectacularly.

funny how the rallying cry of shall not be infringed slowly keeps getting more asterisks.....ya know shall not be infringed unless your ruled to be mentally defective or potentially violent or have ptsd from being in combat etc,people should be careful about who they choose not to support in this fight as give it a few years and you too will be labeled mentally ill

odd how the us government consistently tries to disarm individuals they deem to be unsavory or view as threats ,like how it used to be illegal to provide firearms to native Americans ,or how old laws prevented black people from being able to purchases fire arms ,or how the new proposed law that has the potential to disarm every US veteran overnight via "mental health" reasons due to a good deal of them having ptsd diagnosis

TLDR today's sane are tomorrows mentally ill if the dsm keeps getting more convoluted

a reply to: ScientificRailgun Now you hit it.....it IS a us verses them when it comes to the constitution, Those, like us do not want any tampering...at all. Even the little chipping away these people want is unacceptable. We are at a crossroads in time and history, the liar and his cabinet want to leave a legacy of lovely peachy progressive craphole, and will do what it takes...some can see it and some cannot (or will not). this has been done before, and will come up again....but see through the plan, it is not about the children...its about power...period...

a reply to: macman

I wrote a lot longer response, but I'm going to shorten it to two points.

First, I do not think childish memes belong in an adult conversation. It degrades things and personally, I think hurts your stance. It would hurt mine if I did the same.

Second, why I feel a restriction on violent and mentally ill people should be enacted is this: I have rage issues, therefore, I do not purchase guns. I have not strung together enough years of not punching a wall because I am disproportionately upset. I have not strung together enough MONTHS where I wasn't upset with my wife for something stupid. While I have instances of not being clear headed, my clear thoughts tell me not to buy a gun because people like me are the ones who end up on the news. Going from punching a wall to shooting up a store is a big leap, but so is being upset that someone cut you off to punching a wall.

I am not 100% on this stance. I understand the slippery slope. I just know we cannot trust everyone to self regulate in the way I do. I'm not trying to be sanctimonious here, but it's the truth.

I'll repeat it again, making it difficult for violent and mentally ill people to obtain guns is a good thing.

a reply to: ScientificRailgun

Most gun violence in the US are concentrated in the inner cities, why not try to reduce it there? Most guns used in crime are either stolen or bought by a straw purchaser. Both acts are already against current laws. Why do we need more laws that can and will curtail the freedom of citizens without achieving the desired effect of reducing the majority of gun crime?

a reply to: intrepid

Different issue but it's interesting that fetal rights are important to some when the rights of the living don't matter to the same people.

Same issue.

Right's are right''s.

Selectively picking, and choosing when rights matter, and when they don't is the biggest problem in this country.

Hell that is why this country is so messed up.

It was even brought up earlier in the thread with voting.

Same issue that has many faces to it.

a reply to: thenewguy1987

I like Memes. Therefor, I shall continue on. I never claimed to be an adult.

As for YOUR rage issues. Sounds like YOU have taken YOUR own steps. The Govt has no business in doing this.
Mental illness is about as vague as it gets.

a reply to: Hefficide

Even with extremely tight gun regulations, Australia continues to suffer mass killings on a similar scale to the US. While a couple were accomplished with guns, several utilized fire and even knives as the method.

Good point.
The backers of these anti-gun laws don't seem to understand one very vital point.

You can pass a law against guns.... but guns will still exist and people will still be able to get them.

People that commit murder obviously have no regard for laws to begin with.

a reply to: thenewguy1987

On the other hand I am diagnosed as mentally ill, own it, admit it and speak openly about it. Having said that, I am 48 years old and have no criminal record at all. Even my motor vehicle report is completely blank. I've had ONE speeding ticket in my entire life - and even that was nearly three decades back.

There is nothing in my behavior that would indicate a violent predisposition whatsoever - but since "mental illness" gets the broad brush - I'm stuck in the same category as Jeffrey Dahmer and, damnit, that's just not right.

Sadly the US Government is not only NOT seeking to educate people about the truth of mental illness - they are actively engaged in trying to muddy the waters. Oh, and at the same time as they are telling you to fear all of us crazy folk - they're fanatically cutting the mental health budgets on nearly every level.

Yup. That's the game plan. Paint mental illness as a singular issue - and then demonize the entire category and everyone in it. Begin moving the lines outward to include more and more people - all while ceasing to provide care for the dangerous and not-dangerous alike so that more of the far end of the spectrum unstable folks will likely end up freaking out and doing stupid things.... which oils the entire machine to keep running faster and faster.

Like I said earlier - brilliant in a strategic way. Like a dog digging out of a well fenced yard, they've found some soft soil and they are digging.

a reply to: thenewguy1987

Also.....Mental illness does not mean violent person.

a reply to: butcherguy

People that commit murder obviously have no regard for laws to begin with.

I have never committed murder, and have no regard for laws, or the body that makes them.

The only thing laws do is make the writers rich,the congressman who pass them rich, and the lawyers who skirt them rich.

a reply to: thenewguy1987 Very brave and really enlightening, hope the best for you. Now there are a lot of people with anger issues...more than you know. But there are already laws for these situations, shootings, muggings, stabbing, lots of things can be a deadly weapon. With your self described issues, if you have a record of behavior, arrested, and seen a judge, he is required to evaluate you at a level the prosecuting atty agrees with. You can be found not legally able to get a gun....but you could get one from many, many places. If that is a problem, there are other types of weapons. People, there are already laws on the books of every state on this, just not an open ended measuring stick that Obammy keeps with his pen and phone....next to Valerie's leash...

a reply to: MoreBeer

I will be a labeled a racist because I dared type that sentence.

That is a good example.

People get labeled racist who aren't racist.

Thus by extension people who aren't crazy will be labeled crazy.

First let us stop pretending like we are living in anything but, the least restrictive gun control in American history. Plenty of times in the past guns have been kept out the hands of certain groups of people. Plenty of times certain fire arms have been restricted, plenty of times people right to carry weapons into towns (in the wild west in particular) have been banned. And in all these cases the courts upheld them or they were not even challenged because it was considered the right thing to do. Never in our history have weapons of such power been so freely available to anybody.

And because of that we have a nation of idiots with weapons. Because we make it harder in get a drivers license and own car then it is to buy and own a weapon, we have people who do not take that ownership seriously. The Government has given us more freedom than ever to own weapons and we taken that and screwed it up. Failure to secures weapons, basic weapons safety, gun owners not being held responsible, and a basic lack of common sense is going to in time turn public opinion against guns. And as we have seen through our history the Second is so vague it that how it is interpreted changes all the time.

I would like to see required safety classes, back ground checks and gun owners held legally responsible for failing to safety handle or secure their weapons. You want to own a gun? Then you have to be responsible for it. Otherwise all the morons who have guns are going to ruin it for responsible gun owners such as myself. Gun owners can thank themselves for any gun laws that get passed. Because frankly most of you should not have one.

a reply to: MrSpad

I truly believe that gun safety and respect for firearms should be top priority for anyone owning firearms. However, the media makes it seem like it is more dangerous now than ever because there are more guns out there. If you look at the FBI statistics, you will see a lot of it is hot air. We have more guns than ever in circulation yet our violent crime rate have dropped almost by half in just a few decades.

originally posted by: macman
a reply to: thenewguy1987

Also.....Mental illness does not mean violent person.

True, but there ARE mental illnesses that predispose people to violence.

Sociopathy, Psychopathy, Bi-Polar, etc. All have the potential to be violent if not to themselves, then to others.

Would YOU sell a gun to psychopath, KNOWING he was a psychopath?

dont your goverment also think conspiracy theorists are also mentally ill.
so by that definition none of us can have a gun in the us,this will change nothing ive seen the films with mexicans selling illegal guns out the back of vans lol.