Gunman kills 19 children, 2 adults in Texas grade school

[mapuc]

For me as an outsider it is shocking that an 18 years old can walk right into a weapon shop, buy an assault weapon with ammo and walk away with it.
(This what our Reporter said in the news)

Markus

[Platapus]

Keep in mind that an Assault Weapon is a political/legal term, not necessarily a technically accurate term.

[Rockstar]

Originally Posted by Commander Wallace

Sadly Andrew, the comprehensive back ground checks have lagged behind the times. Some states do a very good job of checking the background of people looking to buy firearms. Other states, not so much.

Apparently, the moron who shot these kids had posted on social media that he was planning " something big. " It has been reported he purchased the weapons he used in this rampage shortly after he turned 18.

Mental heath checks should certainly be mandatory in the purchase of weapons.

What the hell does ‘comprehensive background check’ mean? IMO it’s a meaningless political catch phrase. But just in case I’m wrong maybe you can enlighten me.

How on earth will this mental health check be of any help if someone has never visited a doctor of psychiatry and been diagnosed with a mental disorder and what mental disorder would you deny someone legal possession of a firearm?

If someone like this 18 year old child has no record of any felony or certain misdemeanor charges convictions what will a background check prove?

How about we sheetcan social media platforms, dump the cell phones, turn off the TV, stop handing out medications to ‘fix’ children’s behavior like it was candy, learn how to write a letter instead of texting

There isn’t a law anywhere on any of the books that ‘stops’ anyone or can prevent people from doing anything they want. It takes more than a bunch of idiot politicians and drama queens bickering like little girls and calling each other names and baby killers and generating even more laws. IMO it’ll take a helluva lot more than those clowns on the hill can do.

[mapuc]

This what one of my American friend wrote in an answer to a common friend

"With the Republican party it goes in one ear and out the other , they are in bed with the NRA who pays them off from passing gun laws."

I'm not much into American politics I hope that both side is interested in some kind of regulation.

Markus

[Commander Wallace]

Originally Posted by Rockstar

What the hell does ‘comprehensive background check’ mean? IMO it’s a meaningless political catch phrase. But just in case I’m wrong maybe you can enlighten me.

How on earth will this mental health check be of any help if someone has never visited a doctor of psychiatry and been diagnosed with a mental disorder and what mental disorder would you deny someone legal possession of a firearm?

If someone like this 18 year old child has no record of any felony or certain misdemeanor charges convictions what will a background check prove?

How about we sheetcan social media platforms, dump the cell phones, turn off the TV, stop handing out medications to ‘fix’ children’s behavior like it was candy, learn how to write a letter instead of texting

There isn’t a law anywhere on any of the books that ‘stops’ anyone or can prevent people from doing anything they want. It takes more than a bunch of idiot politicians and drama queens bickering like little girls and calling each other names and baby killers and generating even more laws. IMO it’ll take a helluva lot more than those clowns on the hill can do.

Comprehensive means just that, not a half ass-ed wink and a nod. I'm all for 2nd amendment and hunter rights. August had pointed something out in an earlier post. It's not so much the weapons but the crazies behind them. With that in mind, I think we can all agree that mentally unbalanced and unstable people shouldn't have access to weapons.

We have had 2 major shootings in 6 days in Texas and Buffalo New York. Only an Idiot would say we don't have an epidemic or problem. With the public having access to weapons, things will happen. I submit that the vast majority of people with weapons are law abiding, forthright and stable people. Crazy and moronic people with guns are the problem.

To be sure, without guns, these people will find other ways to kill but won't be able to kill as many in such a short amount of time and give law enforcement time to to arrive and restrain them or take them out. If people want to kill, they will do it with knives, baseball bats, cars, rocks etc..... You pointed that out and you are right that this individual didn't show up " on radar."

It hasn't been reported that this individual had any mental issues but they are still investigating. There are no hard and fast ways to prevent shootings but certainly, if the will was there, these schools could be made secure relatively cheaply.

Originally Posted by Platapus

At some point we will need to address the boundaries between HIPAA and Public Safety and that won't be easy nor pleasant.

None of this will be easy but we need to start somewhere.

[Kptlt. Neuerburg]

Ah the don't blame the tool argument.. Well while there are plenty of other ways to commit mass murder if the gunman didn't have the gun then what would he use? A knife, a hammer, an axe, a concrete in-cased bulldozer? A person is a lot more likely to survive a stab or a slash then they would after a bullet explodes someones brains all over a 5 year old students desk.

[Rockstar]

Originally Posted by Commander Wallace

Comprehensive means just that, not a half ass-ed wink and a nod.

That still doesn’t explain what a comprehensive background check is. It’s a feel good statement.

I'm all for 2nd amendment and hunter rights. August had pointed something out in an earlier post. It's not so much the weapons but the crazies behind them. With that in mind, I think we can all agree that mentally unbalanced and unstable people shouldn't have access to weapons.

I think we can agree. But AGAIN I ask, if a someone has never visited a psychiatrist who can make a professional diagnoses which could prevent someone from legally possessing a firearm what good is your comprehensive background check going to do? Next question is what mental disorder are you speaking of that would disqualify someone from possessing a firearm?

We have had 2 major shootings in 6 days in Texas and Buffalo New York. Only an Idiot would say we don't have an epidemic or problem. With the public having access to weapons, things will happen. I submit that the vast majority of people with weapons are law abiding, forthright and stable people. Crazy and moronic people with guns are the problem.

Don’t forget the Asian hate crime in California.

Yet we have a crap ton of laws already on the books which quite clearly explain to the community that killing another is wrong and a punishable offense. Still, there are both insane and sane who disregard the multitude of laws already on the books and kill. If someone has never had any priors or convictions that snazzy comprehensive background check will like the mental health check reveal absolutely nothing which disqualifies a buyer.

There is one law on the books that has been proven time and time again which points to the reason why people including those who never had priors or mental disorders kill. It’s the Law of Causation maybe start looking into that to find root causes because it sure as hell doesn’t seem to me lack of comprehensive background checks or enacting more laws will prevent people from having so little regard for another’s life.

[Commander Wallace]

If you don't know what comprehensive means, I don't know what to tell you. Have it your way with regards to a " feel good statement.".


Definition of comprehensive




1 : covering completely or broadly : inclusive comprehensive examinations



As for everything else, isn't that what I have already said ?

[Rockstar]

Originally Posted by Commander Wallace

If you don't know what comprehensive means, I don't know what to tell you.


Definition of comprehensive




1 : covering completely or broadly : inclusive comprehensive examinations



As for everything else, isn't that what I have already said ?

No I don’t think you even came close. I know what comprehensive means: ‘covering completely or broadly’. You keep saying we need ‘comprehensive background checks’. I’m asking you what the hell that means in other words when you send the bill to the house for a vote what exactly is in the bill you just proposed? Will all citizens be required to take monthly psych evaluation? Will insurance companies cover the cost? I also asked what good does it do for those without priors who legally purchase a firearm and use it later to take another’s life? Will we be required to register all firearms and ask permission from a central switch board to open our government approved safe we have to buy and keep in our home?

Did you read anything concerning the law of causation? It’s a real honest to goodness law of nature we can’t deny. Which was why I suggested maybe looking at root causes that may explain the individuals actions. Hell we may even find they had things in common. Might learn what drives people to have so little regard for another’s life or the multitude of laws already on the books.

I think Ostfriese offered a good idea that actually benefits people

[Kptlt. Neuerburg]

[Ostfriese]

Originally Posted by Kptlt. Neuerburg

Ah the don't blame the tool argument.. Well while there are plenty of other ways to commit mass murder if the gunman didn't have the gun then what would he use? A knife, a hammer, an axe, a concrete in-cased bulldozer? A person is a lot more likely to survive a stab or a slash then they would after a bullet explodes someones brains all over a 5 year old students desk.

In addition to that:
The "tool" doesn't exist in a vacuum. Besides their function as a killing "tool" (unlike a knife they don't have another function) they are a symbol, and they influence people in a negative, damaging way, and especially young people have a hard time resisting these influences.

[mapuc]

Originally Posted by Rockstar

That still doesn’t explain what a comprehensive background check is. It’s a feel good statement.



I think we can agree. But AGAIN I ask, if a someone has never visited a psychiatrist who can make a professional diagnoses which could prevent someone from legally possessing a firearm what good is your comprehensive background check going to do? Next question is what mental disorder are you speaking of that would disqualify someone from possessing a firearm?

1. Set age to 21 before you legally can purchase a weapon
2. If no Psychological diagnose has been made before-The person shall take one of these test.
3. Should it be the buyer or the seller of weapon who should collect information from the police about the buyer ?

Markus

[Cybermat47]

Mental healthcare and the ease with which people are getting their hands on firearms both need to be adressed.

In Australia, you need to go through a whole process before you're allowed to own a firearm. As a result, we've gone decades without a mass shooting and I've still been able to send plenty of lead downrange.

The idea that the US doesn't have a similar system on the federal level seems absurd to me, but how else are all these insane people getting their hands on firearms?

The only people with firearms should be people who have proven that they can use them safely and responsibly. The US already does the same with other dangerous tools like cars, after all.

[August]

Originally Posted by Ostfriese

In addition to that:
The "tool" doesn't exist in a vacuum. Besides their function as a killing "tool" (unlike a knife they don't have another function) they are a symbol, and they influence people in a negative, damaging way, and especially young people have a hard time resisting these influences.

No the tool doesn't exist in a vacuum which is kind of the point but it's irrelevant how many uses you can get out of rifle that doesn't involve killing (although I can think of three off the top of my head) as human rights, especially constitutionally protected ones, do not have to be justified.


Another thing one should realize is that abuse of a right does not justify denying it to everyone. There's a fine legal term (in Latin no less) that Platapus is fond of which illustrates this principle. If it did we would soon have no rights at all, because they all have been abused at some point somehow.



The problem is not guns any more than SUVs were the problem in the Black Racist attack on that parade in Wisconsin last winter. The problem is how we ignore lunacy like that until it's too late.

[mapuc]

Instead of discussing what your favorite politician have said they would do(as they do each time this happens)

I ask you what would you do to, not prevent because this is impossible, but to make it harder to buy a weapon ?

Markus