[njbchbum]

If the President is as outraged and offended by mass shootings and the need for stricter gun control laws - why has he not stayed on top of a project re background checking that he ordered?

Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence

[Jima64]

Bad guys would still get them when they need them. Two ladies in Folkkston Ga. Are glad they had theirs.

[tuccillo]

You can't buy an assault rifle. Fully automatic weapons are essentially illegal.

Originally Posted by dotti105

One thing I know, Germany, Great Britain, Australia, Switzerland, Sweden, Denmark, Norway are only a few of the many countries having a lower rate of violent crime than the US. They all have laws which call for registration of handguns and possession of firearms are limited.

Assault rifles are only for the military, not for paranoid citizens

We live in the greatest country in the world. But that does not mean than we can't learn from other countries.

The gun related deaths in our country, especially those in schools, is the highest in the world. Folks there is something wrong with our system. We are NOT safer because we "we have the right to bear arms". If fact if there is a gun in your home, the likely hood of a family member dying from a gun death increases dramatically.

The system is broken, and we are doing nothing to fix it. Unless we do, more innocent children will die. Guaranteed. I hope none of them are your grandchildren.

[JoMar]

Originally Posted by outlaw

We already have background checks. I still don't like the idea of having to be in a government database, fingerprints on file, just to achieve my 2nd amendment right. I have a CWP and I resent the government "allowing" me my right to self protection. That is a basic human right in my opinion. Requiring background checks, finger printing, license and license fee are "infringing" on my 2nd A right.

And, of course, this whole argument is about you right? Nobody else does or should matter if it conflicts with you. So, am I right in assuming that you believe anyone should have access, even the drug users or the mentally ill. Am I right to assume that people that have committed prior violence or have broken the law should have access. Am I right to assume that fully automatic rifles, machine guns or any caliber that will ever be made should be available to everyone. I'm a gun carrying vet, with a concealed weapon permit that is for my self protection and I will fight for my 2nd amendment right to do that. But I will fight against those weapons that aren't for self protection and to keep them out of the hands of those that have a history of violence, are drug users or mentally ill. If you have a better way than government to accomplish that then put it out there. Remember the environment when the 2nd amendment was adopted, they couldn't imagine the weapons we have today. IMHO

[applesoffh]

Originally Posted by JoMar

And, of course, this whole argument is about you right? Nobody else does or should matter if it conflicts with you. So, am I right in assuming that you believe anyone should have access, even the drug users or the mentally ill. Am I right to assume that people that have committed prior violence or have broken the law should have access. Am I right to assume that fully automatic rifles, machine guns or any caliber that will ever be made should be available to everyone. I'm a gun carrying vet, with a concealed weapon permit that is for my self protection and I will fight for my 2nd amendment right to do that. But I will fight against those weapons that aren't for self protection and to keep them out of the hands of those that have a history of violence, are drug users or mentally ill. If you have a better way than government to accomplish that then put it out there. Remember the environment when the 2nd amendment was adopted, they couldn't imagine the weapons we have today. IMHO

The voice of reason among us. I came from a big city (9 million plus) and it never would have occurred to me to have a gun. My husband had a gun, and a permit, because of his job, but as soon as he moved into a different job for the same employer, he turned in the gun.

Now that I live here, we are considering purchasing a gun, legally, of course, to protect ourselves from those around us who feel the need to carry a concealed weapon. Where does any of this make sense? The problem isn't the 2nd Amendment (times were vastly different in the 1700s), it's the ability of the mentally ill to purchase guns, drug runners to purchase guns, and folks with evil hearts to purchase guns. It seems to me the problem is two fold - the ability of just about anyone who wants a weapon to purchase a weapon, and the proliferation of illegal guns. Common sense, yes, but how do we get control of illegal weapons in this country? Anyone who can come up with a real answer to this problem, regardless of political party, will get my vote.

[tomwed]

Originally Posted by applesoffh

Now that I live here, we are considering purchasing a gun, legally, of course, to protect ourselves from those around us who feel the need to carry a concealed weapon.

With a legal gun you would protect yourself from concealed weapon carriers in case they are shooting at you by mistake.
I hear there's water on mars.

[fred53]

Originally Posted by outlaw

We already have background checks. I still don't like the idea of having to be in a government database, fingerprints on file, just to achieve my 2nd amendment right. I have a CWP and I resent the government "allowing" me my right to self protection. That is a basic human right in my opinion. Requiring background checks, finger printing, license and license fee are "infringing" on my 2nd A right.

a person who has no consideration for others rights feels it's his right...blah, blah, blah...I to believe in a CWP, but unlike you I don't feel it harms me in any way possible for the gov't to have my prints, ssn, background info, blood type, dna chart or anything else...why? Because I've nothing to hide and unlike some not so law-abiding citizens(wink-wink, nod-nod, you know who I mean)I'm not afraid of them coming for me in the dead of night or broad daylight....

It's all well and good to profess your freedoms, but you sing a much different tune when you infringe on others freedoms eh?

As for "basic human right"? Seriously...no one is that naive...or are they? A basic human right is not to have to fear being assaulted by others..."ahem"...that'd be those who force others to listen to blaring noise that is illegal and dangerous...

If you want your basic human rights then it's only right you allow others theirs...or are those that force obscene noise on others just giving lip service?

[goodtimesintv]

THIS, not the guns, is the elephant in the room!


"The past decade lays out tragic evidence of the thread uniting mass shootings and mental illness:

* Seung-Hui Cho. As a child, Cho was diagnosed with severe anxiety disorder and placed under treatment. On December 13, 2005, he was found "mentally ill and in need of hospitalization. On April 16, 2007, he killed 32 people and wounded 17 others at a University in Virginia.

* Jiverly Wong. In a letter dated March 18, 2009, Wong expressed his concerns to a local television station that undercover police officers were changing the channels on his television, making the air “unbreathable,” and had figured out a way to play music directly into his ear. On April 3, 2009, Wong walked into the American Civic Association immigration center in Binghamton, New York and killed 13 people, wounding four others.

* Maj. Nidal Hasan. In early 2009, the mental health officials who worked alongside Hasan held a series of meetings where they discussed his bizarre and paranoid behavior. Some openly wondered whether Hasan was psychotic. On November 5, 2009, Hasan opened fire at an army base near Fort Hood, Texas, killing 13 people and wounding 30 others.

* Jared Loughner. On September 10, 2010, Loughner was asked to leave Pima Community College in Tucson on mental health grounds – a psychologist who reviewed his journals believes he showed symptoms of schizophrenia. Four months later Loughner unloaded his 9mm Glock pistol into the parking lot of a Tucson shopping mall, killing six and injuring 13.

* James Holmes. Between March 16th and June 11, 2012, the psychiatrist who treated Holmes, Dr. Lynn Fenton, wrote in her notes that Holmes "may be shifting insidiously into a frank psychotic disorder such as schizophrenia.” On July 20, 2012 Holmes walked into an Aurora, Colorado movie theater and killed 12 people, injuring 70 others.

* Aaron Alexis. On August 4, 2013, naval police were called to Alexis' hotel at Naval Station Newport and found that he had "taken apart his bed, believing someone was hiding under it, and observed that Alexis had taped a microphone to the ceiling to record the voices of people that were following him.” On September 16, 2013, Alexis fatally shot 12 people and injured three others at the Washington Navy Yard.

In the case of Newtown, Connecticut shooter Adam Lanza, the warning signs of a severe mental health issue were right out in the open for everyone to see.

Adam, who was diagnosed as a child with Sensory Perception Disorder, a condition that made made bright lights, loud sounds and certain textures unbearable, secluded himself in his bedroom for weeks at a time. While left to himself he covered his windows with dark garbage bags to block the light out, and spent his time played violent video games and studying mass killers, compiling an extensive database that read like a scorecard.

A Yale psychiatrist who briefly treated Lanza says he "displayed a profound autism spectrum disorder with rigidity, isolation and a lack of comprehension of ordinary social interaction and communications.”

Lanza never accepted his diagnosis and refused to take medication or undergo further treatment. Since he was over the age of 18, his mother, Nancy Lanza, who was acutely aware of his severe mental health issues, could only hope for the best.

This severely mentally ill young man, obsessed with violence and surrounded by automatic weapons, who had cut off almost everyone he cared about, made a series of terrifying posts all but telegraphing the future violence on a public on the mass-killer website.

In December 2011 he posted. “It goes without saying that an AK-47 and enough ammunition could do more good than a thousand 'teachers,' if one is truly interested in reforming the system…[the children] are already dead.”

On December 14, 2012, in Newtown, Connecticut, Lanza fatally shot 20 children and 6 adult staff members at Sandy Hook elementary.....

http://www.newsweek.com/charleston-m...ootings-344789

[buzzy]

Originally Posted by dotti105

One thing I know, Germany, Great Britain, Australia, Switzerland, Sweden, Denmark, Norway are only a few of the many countries having a lower rate of violent crime than the US. They all have laws which call for registration of handguns and possession of firearms are limited.

..................

I would bet that in countries like these the laws are enforced, and the citizens have more respect for others. Here, the laws are selectively enforced, lawyers get the bad guys off, and everybody looks the other way to be politically correct. We don't need more gun control, we need more people control.

[fred53]

Originally Posted by buzzy

I would bet that in countries like these the laws are enforced, and the citizens have more respect for others. Here, the laws are selectively enforced, lawyers get the bad guys off, and everybody looks the other way to be politically correct. We don't need more gun control, we need more people control.

they don't have more respect for others...just more fear of gov't...they also have enormously fewer freedoms than we do...yup...even places like Great Britain and Switzerland have fewer liberties...there's a very good reason why most people who visit here want to move here....

I agree mostly with the rest of what you say...

[Bonnevie]

[QUOTE=goodtimesintv;1123364]THIS, not the guns, is the elephant in the room!


"The past decade lays out tragic evidence of the thread uniting mass shootings and mental illness:

* Seung-Hui Cho. As a child, Cho was diagnosed with severe anxiety disorder and placed under treatment. On December 13, 2005, he was found "mentally ill and in need of hospitalization. On April 16, 2007, he killed 32 people and wounded 17 others at a University in Virginia.

* Jiverly Wong. In a letter dated March 18, 2009, Wong expressed his concerns to a local television station that undercover police officers were changing the channels on his television, making the air “unbreathable,” and had figured out a way to play music directly into his ear. On April 3, 2009, Wong walked into the American Civic Association immigration center in Binghamton, New York and killed 13 people, wounding four others.

* Maj. Nidal Hasan. In early 2009, the mental health officials who worked alongside Hasan held a series of meetings where they discussed his bizarre and paranoid behavior. Some openly wondered whether Hasan was psychotic. On November 5, 2009, Hasan opened fire at an army base near Fort Hood, Texas, killing 13 people and wounding 30 others.

* Jared Loughner. On September 10, 2010, Loughner was asked to leave Pima Community College in Tucson on mental health grounds – a psychologist who reviewed his journals believes he showed symptoms of schizophrenia. Four months later Loughner unloaded his 9mm Glock pistol into the parking lot of a Tucson shopping mall, killing six and injuring 13.

* James Holmes. Between March 16th and June 11, 2012, the psychiatrist who treated Holmes, Dr. Lynn Fenton, wrote in her notes that Holmes "may be shifting insidiously into a frank psychotic disorder such as schizophrenia.” On July 20, 2012 Holmes walked into an Aurora, Colorado movie theater and killed 12 people, injuring 70 others.

* Aaron Alexis. On August 4, 2013, naval police were called to Alexis' hotel at Naval Station Newport and found that he had "taken apart his bed, believing someone was hiding under it, and observed that Alexis had taped a microphone to the ceiling to record the voices of people that were following him.” On September 16, 2013, Alexis fatally shot 12 people and injured three others at the Washington Navy Yard.

In the case of Newtown, Connecticut shooter Adam Lanza, the warning signs of a severe mental health issue were right out in the open for everyone to see.

Adam, who was diagnosed as a child with Sensory Perception Disorder, a condition that made made bright lights, loud sounds and certain textures unbearable, secluded himself in his bedroom for weeks at a time. While left to himself he covered his windows with dark garbage bags to block the light out, and spent his time played violent video games and studying mass killers, compiling an extensive database that read like a scorecard.

A Yale psychiatrist who briefly treated Lanza says he "displayed a profound autism spectrum disorder with rigidity, isolation and a lack of comprehension of ordinary social interaction and communications.”

Lanza never accepted his diagnosis and refused to take medication or undergo further treatment. Since he was over the age of 18, his mother, Nancy Lanza, who was acutely aware of his severe mental health issues, could only hope for the best.

This severely mentally ill young man, obsessed with violence and surrounded by automatic weapons, who had cut off almost everyone he cared about, made a series of terrifying posts all but telegraphing the future violence on a public on the mass-killer website.

In December 2011 he posted. “It goes without saying that an AK-47 and enough ammunition could do more good than a thousand 'teachers,' if one is truly interested in reforming the system…[the children] are already dead.”

On December 14, 2012, in Newtown, Connecticut, Lanza fatally shot 20 children and 6 adult staff members at Sandy Hook elementary.....


just as you don't want gun rights restricted, in these cases the people at the time did not meet the current criteria for commitment, which is they did not appear to be a danger to themselves or others. So with mental health, the slope is just as slippery. When is someone just "odd" or when are they possible mass murderers? do we commit every person who is different...and what constitutes difference? in the case of Lanza, the person who should possibly be held more accountable is the gun owner....who, while knowing of her son's mental health, left him alone without properly securing her large quantities of weapons. just as there are millions of responsible gun owners, there are millions of people who have been treated for mental disorders who will never be mass murderers.

What all these people do have in common is the ability to arm themselves with weapons capable of shooting many people, very quickly.

This latest shooter had:

Investigators found 13 firearms connected to shooter, Celinez Nunez of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives said.

maybe the shear numbers of one's weaponry should be a flag. I realize that some people collect them, but what would be wrong for more stringent checks on people owning certain kinds of weapons and that many.

[billethkid]

Originally Posted by buzzy

I would bet that in countries like these the laws are enforced, and the citizens have more respect for others. Here, the laws are selectively enforced, lawyers get the bad guys off, and everybody looks the other way to be politically correct. We don't need more gun control, we need more people control.

And you would win that bet.
We TALK about the law of the land........ Wink, wink!

[outlaw]

Originally Posted by JoMar

And, of course, this whole argument is about you right? Nobody else does or should matter if it conflicts with you. So, am I right in assuming that you believe anyone should have access, even the drug users or the mentally ill. Am I right to assume that people that have committed prior violence or have broken the law should have access. Am I right to assume that fully automatic rifles, machine guns or any caliber that will ever be made should be available to everyone. I'm a gun carrying vet, with a concealed weapon permit that is for my self protection and I will fight for my 2nd amendment right to do that. But I will fight against those weapons that aren't for self protection and to keep them out of the hands of those that have a history of violence, are drug users or mentally ill. If you have a better way than government to accomplish that then put it out there. Remember the environment when the 2nd amendment was adopted, they couldn't imagine the weapons we have today. IMHO

First, when I wrote "I" in my comment, it was as a representative of the American citizen. "I" is much shorter. I should have said American citizens right should not be infringed. If you want to restrict an American citizen's right to bear arms, then you should work to change the amendment, not make laws that violate the amendment. Or better yet, work to have the government enforce the already onerous laws on the books. If you really want an in depth understanding of the 2nd A, I recommend you read this analysis A CRITICAL GUIDE TO THE SECOND AMENDMENT . It's pretty long, but if you really are interested in understanding the meaning of the 2nd A words and intentions of the authors, I think you will enjoy it.

[outlaw]

Originally Posted by borjo

That's what he needs to address! I bet he doesn't know what to do, hasn't said anything that I heard to address the violence in the cities. That's an on going problem with more fatalities than the occasional mass shooter.

A good start would be to enforce the laws on the books. Most of these Chicago shooters have a rap sheet, yet are still out on the street. They would not be doing drive-bys in prison, which is where they belong.

[outlaw]

How many of you that think we need "reasonable" gun laws would be in favor of a law to restrict driving privileges to just those people who don't drink alcohol? Most posters on here would agree that drunk driving is a problem in this country, and there are too many tragic DUI rated fatalities. So why not just issue driving licenses to people with no history of drinking alcohol and require them to state this under oath, for which the penalty for lying is 5 or 10 years in prison. Better still, safe driving requires one to be responsible and law abiding. Those who have demonstrated their lack of respect for the law, such as convicted felons, should not be allowed to drive, ever. Or those with a history of violence, should not be allowed to drive, and their car confiscated. Most people would say that is unreasonable. Yet there are 1000s of deaths each year from car accidents. But when it comes to scary black guns, and your most sacred human rights, many are willing to trash the constitution.