Guns out of control

[lickhermore]

http://www.fourwinds10.net/siterun_d...p?q=1343231885


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=epZod2qyyN4

[anon_de_plume]

Originally Posted by ejls

A knife is to cut food? Did you ever hear about Jack the Ripper? Did you hear about the Manson Family murders where they cut an unborn baby out of its mother's stomach?

Guns are not the only thing used to kill.

But a gun is by far the weapon of choice. A knife is too personal and requires that you be be in close proximity to your victim. Too intimate. A hammer is also a little too intimate, you can try throwing, but unless it is Thor's hammer, it's a one shot, hit or miss kind of thing.

A gun on the other hand, is quite impersonal, allowing the artist to start way back from his canvas, almost like Pollack, and spray his canvas with schrapnel and blood... and when he runs out of bullets, he just grabs another... lather, rinse, repeat!

The main problem of gun control is the NRA, they are fronting for the gun industry at the expense individual rights. It is the NRA that caused these things to happen, they work to get laws passed or repealed, and then the work to cut the funding to the organizations charged with enforcing the gun control laws as they are.

Ban the NRA, not guns.

[anon_de_plume]

Originally Posted by ELaken-Palmer

There is TOO MUCH gun control. If only ONE of those movie-goers had been armed with a hand-gun, that asshole would never have gotten off even a second round.

In what reality? It was a dark theater and who would have known that he was coming in through the back? Your comment assumes that every concealed carry owner is a marksman with gobs of military sharpshooter training...

In a word, naive.

[anon_de_plume]

Originally Posted by xnxxbob

The 24 yr old kid probably was diagnosed by a liberal school nurse with ADHD and given mega doses of Riddilin. He then was a recluse at home in a dysfunctional family, and played violent video games 24/7. That, coupled with violent Hollywood movies drove him to mass murder.

Can we assume you have training and a degree in the black magic arts of speculation?

[stumbler]

Originally Posted by anon_de_plume

But a gun is by far the weapon of choice. A knife is too personal and requires that you be be in close proximity to your victim. Too intimate. A hammer is also a little too intimate, you can try throwing, but unless it is Thor's hammer, it's a one shot, hit or miss kind of thing.

A gun on the other hand, is quite impersonal, allowing the artist to start way back from his canvas, almost like Pollack, and spray his canvas with schrapnel and blood... and when he runs out of bullets, he just grabs another... lather, rinse, repeat!

The main problem of gun control is the NRA, they are fronting for the gun industry at the expense individual rights. It is the NRA that caused these things to happen, they work to get laws passed or repealed, and then the work to cut the funding to the organizations charged with enforcing the gun control laws as they are.

Ban the NRA, not guns.

No I thought the knife analogy was the best argument yet for gun control. In the two cases mentioned we're talking a little over a dozen victims over the space of more than 100 years.

We average about 30,000 deaths per year.

Yeah I'll take my chances with a guy with just a knife over someone with an assault rifle with 100 shot magazine anytime.

[anon_de_plume]

Originally Posted by tim929

Baseball and cricket bats have been used as deadly weapons too. As have various forms of household cutlery, pry bars, wrenches, common boards and a variety of other wooden implements. The wepon isnt the issue. The issue stands that some people are cracked in the head. And no matter what you ban, these people will find a way to inflict casualties. We need to find a way to identify and help people who are profoundly mentaly ill and get them the treatment they need rather than just marginalizing them and waiting till they explode.

You can bury people alive... I think we need to ban dirt!

[AZRIEL]

[the fox]

[tim929]

Originally Posted by stumbler

Well I'm just not going to go along with the idea that the number of rounds a gun can carry doesn't make any difference.

The reason we had the 1994 ban was the Stockton school yard shooting. He had two 75 round clips. And the Colorado shooter had 100.

And let's not get carried with the bullshit. Not me or anyone else I know of is talking about banning guns. But as Supreme court justice Scalia recently pointed out under the current definition of keep and bear arms shoulder mounted rocket launchers that can bring down passenger planes are legal.

Also don't get me wrong I've very interested in better mental health care and better diagnosis. But I know longer believe in unrestricted access to assault weapons and high capacity clips.

And for one reason I bet I know a couple dozen guys personally who have them and haven't seen a one of them need a gun like that yet.

Having been a shooter since the age of seven I can testify that I can change magazines fast enough that you wouldnt realy care if they held ten shots or one hundred. The end result would be the same. And lets not forget that the stockton shooter fired over two hundred rounds and managed to actualy hit very few people by compairison. Bullets that dont hit anyone are for all intents and purposes just a loud noise. Nobody has ever been killed by a loud noise. Skill with a firearm plays a huge roll in the end results, and a person with decent skills can make even low capacity magazines very, very effective. As for unrestricted access to assault weapons, I dont believe in unrestricted access to any weapon, be it an assault rifle or a baseball bat. As it is now coming out in the press, the theater shooters psychiatrist had begun the process of reporting him to school authorities when he dropped out of school and so the warning to the school simply didnt go anywhere. Psychiatrists need to be required to report potentialy dangerous patients to the state, so that the state can red flag them in an effort to prevent them from obtaining access to firearms of any kind.

There have been a number of high profile shootings over the last couple of decades in which it has come out later that the parents, coworkers, counselors, psychiatrists, teachers, friends and others have been deeply concerned regarding the mental stability of the individual but had absolutly no way to raise a warnig to anyone in a position to do anything about it. In seattle just a couple of weeks befor the Colorado shooting we had a shooting at a cafe where a regular customer who was disgruntled at being barred from the cafe for being disruptive walked in and shot and killed four people, wounded a couple and then shot and killed a fifth person outside the cafe and took her car. He eventualy shot and killed himself when police approached him. His father had been struggling for many months with his son to try to get him mental health care but was powerless to do anything about his sons problems. Had a system been in place to report the issue to authorities they would have been able to red flag this man and prevent him from buying the handgun that he used to kill these people and himself.

Why is it so hard for people to simply identify that the problem isnt with guns, its with the ability of mentaly disturbed people to obtain them? It is absolutly absurd that someone who is mentaly ill can simply walk into a gun store and buy a firearm, I dont care if its a single shot .22 or a ten thousand shot howitzer with laser sights and an espresso maker. You wouldnt walk into a mental health facility and start handing out guns and ammunition. Parents, teachers, counselors and psychiatrists need to have a mechanism that allows them to report these problems to the authorities so that things like this can be prevented. Additionaly, we need a system in place that prevents them from simply buying these weapons from private parties, and the class three system does exactly that. All purchases need to go through a registered dealer who runs all the required background checks on both the buyer and the seller which prevents people who shouldnt have these weapons from getting them.

The only reason anyone opposes this is because their personal goal is to inflict their beliefs on others rather than create a system that actualy might help someone get the care they need rather than just making yet another restriction.

[stumbler]

Originally Posted by tim929

Having been a shooter since the age of seven I can testify that I can change magazines fast enough that you wouldnt realy care if they held ten shots or one hundred. The end result would be the same. And lets not forget that the stockton shooter fired over two hundred rounds and managed to actualy hit very few people by compairison. Bullets that dont hit anyone are for all intents and purposes just a loud noise. Nobody has ever been killed by a loud noise. Skill with a firearm plays a huge roll in the end results, and a person with decent skills can make even low capacity magazines very, very effective. As for unrestricted access to assault weapons, I dont believe in unrestricted access to any weapon, be it an assault rifle or a baseball bat. As it is now coming out in the press, the theater shooters psychiatrist had begun the process of reporting him to school authorities when he dropped out of school and so the warning to the school simply didnt go anywhere. Psychiatrists need to be required to report potentialy dangerous patients to the state, so that the state can red flag them in an effort to prevent them from obtaining access to firearms of any kind.

Tim I've spent a day or two shooting guns myself and I'm doubting you can shoot a clip and reload another before I can slap it out of your hand because you still got to lock and load between changes.

Like I said one little old lady managed to slap the second clip our of the Phoenix killer's hand.

And what kind of skill does it take to hit people in crowded places. Flock shooting works just fine in those instances. All they have to do is just keep pulling that trigger. And don't forge the Aurora killer was hitting people in the theater next door.

These guys aren't shooters or hunters. They are video game trained. And they are shooting fish in barrel. Its actually harder to miss in that situation than it is to hit with ever bullet.

Finally, if I know one thing its that as long as there's lead in the air there's always a chance of hitting something. And 100 round magazines give you a lot more chances.

Ok I lied. The Stockton shooter was shooting a lot more distance at moving targets than your average mass killer and he wasn't even really aiming. But you're talking a playground full of elementary kids running for their lives and the teachers trying to save them.

Fuck man I'll tell you straight up. Just because the kill rate was low that's the scene that told me we were fucking gun nuts. I still can't bear even my on imagination of what those kids when through with someone shooting them for sport.

Originally Posted by tim929

There have been a number of high profile shootings over the last couple of decades in which it has come out later that the parents, coworkers, counselors, psychiatrists, teachers, friends and others have been deeply concerned regarding the mental stability of the individual but had absolutly no way to raise a warnig to anyone in a position to do anything about it. In seattle just a couple of weeks befor the Colorado shooting we had a shooting at a cafe where a regular customer who was disgruntled at being barred from the cafe for being disruptive walked in and shot and killed four people, wounded a couple and then shot and killed a fifth person outside the cafe and took her car. He eventualy shot and killed himself when police approached him. His father had been struggling for many months with his son to try to get him mental health care but was powerless to do anything about his sons problems. Had a system been in place to report the issue to authorities they would have been able to red flag this man and prevent him from buying the handgun that he used to kill these people and himself.

I agree. Specifically what is your solution. How should we handle this? What is the process? Who is in charge of the list?

But remember right now the NRA is fighting to keep it legal for people on a terrorist watch list to buy guns. There's people right here defending that.

Originally Posted by tim929

Why is it so hard for people to simply identify that the problem isnt with guns, its with the ability of mentaly disturbed people to obtain them? It is absolutly absurd that someone who is mentaly ill can simply walk into a gun store and buy a firearm, I dont care if its a single shot .22 or a ten thousand shot howitzer with laser sights and an espresso maker. You wouldnt walk into a mental health facility and start handing out guns and ammunition. Parents, teachers, counselors and psychiatrists need to have a mechanism that allows them to report these problems to the authorities so that things like this can be prevented. Additionaly, we need a system in place that prevents them from simply buying these weapons from private parties, and the class three system does exactly that. All purchases need to go through a registered dealer who runs all the required background checks on both the buyer and the seller which prevents people who shouldnt have these weapons from getting them.

Again I'm all for it. But could you give my your definition of mental illness? I mean who determines that and how? How do you know if this person who has been reported as a mental illness threat isn't the innocent husband of some really pissed off bitchy wife?

By the way what's the infrastructure for reporting this? Suppose someone tells his psychiatrist you know I've been wondering sometimes if I shouldn't commit a mass killing in some crowded place?

Ok so that's a definite warning that should trigger your no guns for nuts policy. What's to keep him from walking out of that psychiatrist's walking into the local gun store, buying two guns with 50 shot clips and 100 rounds of ammo and just start massacring people on his way home?

And when you figure those odds also try to figure the odds of a Marine Corp Sniper with a .50 caliber in the theater if we had more liberal gun laws instead of restrictions. Because when I do the math just by the number of Marine Snipers I've encountered on the internet since this shooting it comes out to more than 100% because apparently there are more Marine Corp snipers on the internet than there are actual Marines.

Originally Posted by tim929

The only reason anyone opposes this is because their personal goal is to inflict their beliefs on others rather than create a system that actualy might help someone get the care they need rather than just making yet another restriction.

No, no now I'm really willing to honestly discuss this with you but you've also got to look at all sides of it.

Because what you're actually saying is instead of restricting any access to guns make a much more stringent legally required system for some human beings to make a subjective judgment about who is and isn't a threat on any given day.

Have you ever lost your temper and looked crazy for a minute or two?

Ever had someone in authority over you that just really wanted to fuck you Over?

Ever seen One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest?

No no don't restrict guns. Expand government control over individuals because you believe in Freedom?

[xnxxbob]

Originally Posted by anon_de_plume

Can we assume you have training and a degree in the black magic arts of speculation?

It was pure levity. But the more I think about it.............it fits.

[stumbler]

This is a breaking story but it looks like here we go again.

Report: At least four killed in shooting at Sikh temple in Wisconsin

Police and a SWAT team have responded to an early Sunday morning mass shooting at a Sikh temple in Oak Creek, Wisconsin.


The Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel reported that 20 to 30 people have been injured in the shooting near Milwaukee. One to four shooters may still be inside the temple with hostages.


TMJ4 reported at least four fatalities, but Oak Creek police have not confirmed those reports.


The suspect has been described as a large, white male wearing a sleeveless shirt.


A police officer was also reported injured by the gunman after responding to the shooting.


CNN reported that two men have been taken to Froedtert hospital. One has been taken to the surgical intensive care unit and the other has been taken to an operating room.


Sikhs are often mistaken for Muslims because of their traditional headwear, and have been the victim of hate crimes targeting Muslims. However, the motive of the shooter is unclear at this point.


Watch video, via CNN, below:

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/08/0...-in-wisconsin/

[xnxxbob]

And in Chicago, a man was stabbed outside of Lolapalooza.................so if not a gun, a knife. Can't we all just get along?

[AZRIEL]

fatman.jpg

[ridgerunner]

for those that posed that the firearms are the issue or that the lack of mental health care or propper reporting are the issues in gun control

the idiot at the temple in wisconsin had several arrests for alchoholic related crimes and was booted from the military due to entoxication while on duty
he also was a member oh a know "hate music" band
so how did he purchase a firearm legaly?
also to add he was a known white-supremicist

now onto holmes
his skull jockey did report worries to the university police and nothing was done

The psychiatrist who treated suspected movie-theater shooter James Holmes made contact with a University of Colorado police officer to express concerns about her patient's behavior several weeks before Holmes' alleged rampage, sources told ABC News.
The sources did not know what the officer approached by Dr. Lynne Fenton did with the information she passed along. They said, however, that the officer was recently interviewed, with an attorney present, by the Aurora Police Department as a part of the ongoing investigation of the shooting.
Fenton would have had to have serious concerns to break confidentiality with her patient to reach out to the police officer or others, the sources said. Under Colorado law, a psychiatrist can legally breach a pledge of confidentiality with a patient if he or she becomes aware of a serious and imminent threat that their patient might cause harm to others. Psychiatrists can also breach confidentiality if a court has ordered them to do so.
"For any physician to break doctor-patient confidentiality there would have to be an extremely good reason," said Dr. Carol Bernstein, Dr. Carol Bernstein, a psychiatrist at NYU Langone Medical Center and past president of the American Psychiatric Association.
Bernstein has no specific knowledge of the Holmes case and spoke in general terms.
"Confidentiality is a key part of the doctor-patient relationship," she said. "It is central to everything we do."
ABC news and affiliate KMGH-TV in Denver first reported Wednesday that Fenton had contacted other members of the university's threat-assessment team about her concerns. The university-wide, threat-assessment team reportedly never met to discuss Holmes after he announced his intent to withdraw from the University nearly six weeks before the July 20 shooting that left 12 dead and 58 injured.
University of Colorado spokeswoman Jacque Montgomery declined to comment on what, if anything, the university police officer might have done with information provided by Fenton, citing a court-issued gag order preventing her from confirming or denying any information related to Fenton or the investigation.
In a written statement to ABC News, however, the university said campus police officers are "frequently involved" in meetings of the university's Behavioral Evaluation and Threat Assessment (BETA) team.
The statement went on to say that police involvement with threat assessment "could include security matters, badge access, background checks, wellness checks, criminal investigations and referrals and outreach to other law enforcement agencies."

i would think that when a psychiatrist breaks confidentialy it should raise flags and warrant a call to the local cops

[stumbler]

Originally Posted by ridgerunner

for those that posed that the firearms are the issue or that the lack of mental health care or propper reporting are the issues in gun control

the idiot at the temple in wisconsin had several arrests for alchoholic related crimes and was booted from the military due to entoxication while on duty
he also was a member oh a know "hate music" band
so how did he purchase a firearm legaly?
also to add he was a known white-supremicist

now onto holmes
his skull jockey did report worries to the university police and nothing was done

The psychiatrist who treated suspected movie-theater shooter James Holmes made contact with a University of Colorado police officer to express concerns about her patient's behavior several weeks before Holmes' alleged rampage, sources told ABC News.
The sources did not know what the officer approached by Dr. Lynne Fenton did with the information she passed along. They said, however, that the officer was recently interviewed, with an attorney present, by the Aurora Police Department as a part of the ongoing investigation of the shooting.
Fenton would have had to have serious concerns to break confidentiality with her patient to reach out to the police officer or others, the sources said. Under Colorado law, a psychiatrist can legally breach a pledge of confidentiality with a patient if he or she becomes aware of a serious and imminent threat that their patient might cause harm to others. Psychiatrists can also breach confidentiality if a court has ordered them to do so.
"For any physician to break doctor-patient confidentiality there would have to be an extremely good reason," said Dr. Carol Bernstein, Dr. Carol Bernstein, a psychiatrist at NYU Langone Medical Center and past president of the American Psychiatric Association.
Bernstein has no specific knowledge of the Holmes case and spoke in general terms.
"Confidentiality is a key part of the doctor-patient relationship," she said. "It is central to everything we do."
ABC news and affiliate KMGH-TV in Denver first reported Wednesday that Fenton had contacted other members of the university's threat-assessment team about her concerns. The university-wide, threat-assessment team reportedly never met to discuss Holmes after he announced his intent to withdraw from the University nearly six weeks before the July 20 shooting that left 12 dead and 58 injured.
University of Colorado spokeswoman Jacque Montgomery declined to comment on what, if anything, the university police officer might have done with information provided by Fenton, citing a court-issued gag order preventing her from confirming or denying any information related to Fenton or the investigation.
In a written statement to ABC News, however, the university said campus police officers are "frequently involved" in meetings of the university's Behavioral Evaluation and Threat Assessment (BETA) team.
The statement went on to say that police involvement with threat assessment "could include security matters, badge access, background checks, wellness checks, criminal investigations and referrals and outreach to other law enforcement agencies."

i would think that when a psychiatrist breaks confidentialy it should raise flags and warrant a call to the local cops

Look even if the guy was on a federal terrorist watch list the NRA and conservative/Republican/Tea Party is insisting he still be able to buy guns.

[skullage]

Originally Posted by shotgun93

I have several points to make about this
1. The bill of rights says we have the right to "keep and bare arms"
2. There is no way you are going to get some people such as me to give up our guns, if the government tries this they are going to be met at the front door holding one on them demanding them off my property.
3. How can you go against the bill of rights
4. Even if guns are banned and taken away, the criminals are going to find another way to commit their dirty doings.

In other words, it is not the fucking guns that kill people, it is the assholes behind the guns that don't have enough mother fucking sense to equal that in a fucking goose! I swear I always hear the same shit, outlaw guns, outlaw violent video games tv and movies, censor free speech. Yeah thats right, first they take away guns, and you can watch every other right start to slowly disappear as well. Give'em an inch? Hell that will not be good enough for them. They will take the whole fucking expressway!

not sure if theres a like button up in here, so, like

[stumbler]

Now if you want to see the gun nuts freak out I'll bet this will do it.

Page, Holmes Used Semiautomatic Handgun

Wisconsin shooter Wade Michael Page used a Springfield 9mm semiautomatic handgun during the attack on a Sikh temple. The gun had been purchased legally at a gun shop in the Milwaukee area. Before moving to Wisconsin, Page had been issued five separate gun purchase permits in North Carolina after passing a background check in May 2008. Semiautomatic handguns are frequently used by mass shooters. It turns out that suspected shooter James Holmes in Aurora, Colo., Jared Loughner in Tucson, Ariz., and Seung-Hui Cho at Virginia Tech all used similar semiautomatic handguns with high-capacity magazines. One gun expert said, “There is no valid reason for civilians to have assault rifles, semiautomatic handguns, and high-capacity magazines.”


Read it at Reuters 


http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheats/...c-handgun.html

[doekahox]

Ya every wonder why most of these mass killing take place in Gun Free Zones. make me wonder what the killers are afraid if . Thank a bout it

[stumbler]

Originally Posted by doekahox

Ya every wonder why most of these mass killing take place in Gun Free Zones. make me wonder what the killers are afraid if . Thank a bout it

Ever notice that semi automatic weapons with high capacity clips kill more people than other rifles and pistols? Think about it.

[deviousdave]

Originally Posted by stumbler

Ever notice that semi automatic weapons with high capacity clips kill more people than other rifles and pistols? Think about it.

Seung-Hui Cho killed 30+ people and injured several others. He used a 9mm Glock 19 and a Walther P22, with a backpack full of 10 round magazines


I believe this was the deadliest shooting incident by a single gunman in U.S. history ?Essentially, it doesn't really matter what weapons you use if you have a plan.

[ladygodiva123]

Originally Posted by tim929

Having been a shooter since the age of seven I can testify that I can change magazines fast enough that you wouldn't really care if they held ten shots or one hundred. The end result would be the same. And lets not forget that the stockton shooter fired over two hundred rounds and managed to actually hit very few people by comparison. Bullets that don't hit anyone are for all intents and purposes just a loud noise. Nobody has ever been killed by a loud noise. Skill with a firearm plays a huge roll in the end results, and a person with decent skills can make even low capacity magazines very, very effective. As for unrestricted access to assault weapons, I don't believe in unrestricted access to any weapon, be it an assault rifle or a baseball bat. As it is now coming out in the press, the theater shooters psychiatrist had begun the process of reporting him to school authorities when he dropped out of school and so the warning to the school simply didn't go anywhere. Psychiatrists need to be required to report potentialy dangerous patients to the state, so that the state can red flag them in an effort to prevent them from obtaining access to firearms of any kind.

There have been a number of high profile shootings over the last couple of decades in which it has come out later that the parents, coworkers, counselors, psychiatrists, teachers, friends and others have been deeply concerned regarding the mental stability of the individual but had absolute+ly no way to raise a warning to anyone in a position to do anything about it. In seattle just a couple of weeks before the Colorado shooting we had a shooting at a cafe where a regular customer who was disgruntled at being barred from the cafe for being disruptive walked in and shot and killed four people, wounded a couple and then shot and killed a fifth person outside the cafe and took her car. He eventually shot and killed himself when police approached him. His father had been struggling for many months with his son to try to get him mental health care but was powerless to do anything about his sons problems. Had a system been in place to report the issue to authorities they would have been able to red flag this man and prevent him from buying the handgun that he used to kill these people and himself.

Why is it so hard for people to simply identify that the problem isn't with guns, its with the ability of mentally disturbed people to obtain them? It is absolutely absurd that someone who is mentally ill can simply walk into a gun store and buy a firearm, I don't care if its a single shot .22 or a ten thousand shot howitzer with laser sights and an espresso maker. You wouldn't walk into a mental health facility and start handing out guns and ammunition. Parents, teachers, counselors and psychiatrists need to have a mechanism that allows them to report these problems to the authorities so that things like this can be prevented. Additionally, we need a system in place that prevents them from simply buying these weapons from private parties, and the class three system does exactly that. All purchases need to go through a registered dealer who runs all the required background checks on both the buyer and the seller which prevents people who shouldn't have these weapons from getting them.

The only reason anyone opposes this is because their personal goal is to inflict their beliefs on others rather than create a system that actually might help someone get the care they need rather than just making yet another restriction.

There is a system in place to force people who need help to get it, but many people don't know how. You go to the county mental health facility and fill out paperwork and tell them why you think the person is a danger to themselves or others. If they agree they will get you to get the person somewhere where they can pick them up safely. They'll be held under observation for 72 hours. After that, if they think the person needs to stay under their care they'll go before a judge. The person has a right to an attorney of course. How do I know this? I had to do it with my father. I think people either don't know they can do this or they can't bring themselves to do it. It's really really hard.

As for laws keeping mentally ill people from getting guns, talk to the NRA. They fight ANY kind of gun control.

[stumbler]

Originally Posted by deviousdave

Seung-Hui Cho killed 30+ people and injured several others. He used a 9mm Glock 19 and a Walther P22, with a backpack full of 10 round magazines


I believe this was the deadliest shooting incident by a single gunman in U.S. history ?Essentially, it doesn't really matter what weapons you use if you have a plan.

You have a point.

How many killings have we had since then?

But you do make a great case for the Brady bunch which is something I'd kind of like to avoid even though I don't own a semi automatic myself.

So how about something in between. Something a little more common sense.

Originally Posted by ladygodiva123

There is a system in place to force people who need help to get it, but many people don't know how. You go to the county mental health facility and fill out paperwork and tell them why you think the person is a danger to themselves or others. If they agree they will get you to get the person somewhere where they can pick them up safely. They'll be held under observation for 72 hours. After that, if they think the person needs to stay under their care they'll go before a judge. The person has a right to an attorney of course. How do I know this? I had to do it with my father. I think people either don't know they can do this or they can't bring themselves to do it. It's really really hard.

As for laws keeping mentally ill people from getting guns, talk to the NRA. They fight ANY kind of gun control.

Look this is just from personal experience. But one thing my extended family could do is get a family member slapped into a mental institution faster than a law enforcement officer could throw you in jail. Except you never got your day in court.

I think the idea of expanding an entire network capable of handling every possible threat (since about 75% or more will be false) and taking government action based on subjective impressions is more frightening than staring down the barrel of a gun.

The idea that people who claim the believe in "freedom" wanting to expand the number of people who can report you, investigate you, and automatically take away not only your right to buy a gun but to even posses them (as in showing up at your house to forceably remove every firearm in the house) just goes to show how ignorant and stupid (two different things) they really are.

[xnxxftw]

I'm with Tackleberry on this subject. Stamp out all who oppose guns and blow the survivors heads off with a Colt Python >:D

[mandyw1265]

If you take guns away from everyone the "bad" people are still going to get them the majority of people who kill people with guns do not obtain their guns legally yes the CO incident is tragic but if some "good" citizens in that theater had guns they could have killed that man right away. He could have walked in there and blew the place up with a bomb and then would you blame the people who sold him normal items that he turned into something bad. No you wouldn't. Bad people do bad things! That man wanted to kill people and he would have done it regardless. I support having guns for protection, hunting, etc. Guns dont kill people, people kill people.

[imova]

There needs to be a better way to report those that need mental help, that are a danger to them selves and others. If the system was more accessible, things like this could be avoided.

As far as banning guns? It won't work. There will always be some kind of weapon that will cause destruction, and most are FAR worse than a gun.

Take McVeigh for example. He used 500 pounds of an Ammonium Nitrate Fuel Oil Mix and detonated it with stole blasting caps. 168 killed, several hundred injured.

It doesn't matter what a person uses, if the will to kill innocent people is there, there is little to stop them.

[ladygodiva123]

Originally Posted by mandyw1265

If you take guns away from everyone the "bad" people are still going to get them the majority of people who kill people with guns do not obtain their guns legally yes the CO incident is tragic but if some "good" citizens in that theater had guns they could have killed that man right away. He could have walked in there and blew the place up with a bomb and then would you blame the people who sold him normal items that he turned into something bad. No you wouldn't. Bad people do bad things! That man wanted to kill people and he would have done it regardless. I support having guns for protection, hunting, etc. Guns dont kill people, people kill people.

and people with guns kill the most people.

[ridgerunner]

earlier today a man was arrested entering a theater to attend a screening of the new batman movie
alert employees noticed a "suspicious bag" the man was carrying
the police were called and found the man in possesion of a handgun and several knives that he claimed to be for self defense due to the prior violence at the theater in colorado

last i knew he was still in custody

and i do not agree with the nra that those involved with possible hate groups or terror groups should be allowed to purchase, posses, or be in proximity to any form of firearm

[imova]

Originally Posted by ridgerunner

earlier today a man was arrested entering a theater to attend a screening of the new batman movie
alert employees noticed a "suspicious bag" the man was carrying
the police were called and found the man in possesion of a handgun and several knives that he claimed to be for self defense due to the prior violence at the theater in colorado

last i knew he was still in custody

and i do not agree with the nra that those involved with possible hate groups or terror groups should be allowed to purchase, posses, or be in proximity to any form of firearm

I'm reading rumors the guy didn't even have a CCL. So not only did he fuck up, he did it in such a way his anus will never be the same again.

[shyguyy2]

Why doesn't stuff like this end up all over the news?
http://deadlinelive.info/2012/08/07/...with-a-pistol/

[ridgerunner]

it was all over the news down here
1 nut case tired of dogshit in his lot killed people and then got killed
the firearm did not kill anyone

and the state of wisconsin does not have a concealed carry law


maybe the focus should be less on control and more on enforcement of the existing laws
begin requiring id for anyone that purchases ammunition and reloading supplies
any person that is on any watch list should be disallowed to purchase any firearms and disallowed to sell or transfer firearms

[shyguyy2]

150+ yards with a pistol is a hell of a lucky shot I was a pistol expert in the Marines and I wouldn't have even tried the shot.

[ridgerunner]

150 with any level of training is hard as hell when the target moves
hell most cant hit at 150feet
but then again mass shootings dont happen too often down here do they

[shyguyy2]

Originally Posted by ridgerunner

but then again mass shootings dont happen too often down here do they

No they don't. But you don't see them at all in rual areas.

[AZRIEL]

[ridgerunner]

shit they killed the catsup

[shyguyy2]

578739_10151014621472762_64943162_n.jpg

[ridgerunner]

the control of iodiocy is not a cure to the issues at hand; you cannot expect idiots to control idiots
common sense has left the populace of america and such we suffer the offences of our own freedoms
we allow rampant criminality to become "pop culture" and even pay for the "privilage"


also the 2nd admendment does not garuntee nor provide that you should be allowed to posses firearms
it states that citizens be alowed possesion of arms in order to maintain an organized malitia
the police and military are the organized malitia
certain areas have a state gaurd and they are recognised as an organised malitia

i still serve as a recall soldier by means of reserve and truth be told any person to have served the military are still recallable unless unfit for combat

i am a volunteer firefighter and serve my post on the chamber of commerce as well as my position on the county council

i will advocate for the requirement of stiffened restrictions on firearms but not new laws

[shyguyy2]

Originally Posted by ridgerunner

the control of iodiocy is not a cure to the issues at hand; you cannot expect idiots to control idiots
common sense has left the populace of america and such we suffer the offences of our own freedoms
we allow rampant criminality to become "pop culture" and even pay for the "privilage"


also the 2nd admendment does not garuntee nor provide that you should be allowed to posses firearms
it states that citizens be alowed possesion of arms in order to maintain an organized malitia
the police and military are the organized malitia
certain areas have a state gaurd and they are recognised as an organised malitia

i still serve as a recall soldier by means of reserve and truth be told any person to have served the military are still recallable unless unfit for combat

i am a volunteer firefighter and serve my post on the chamber of commerce as well as my position on the county council

i will advocate for the requirement of stiffened restrictions on firearms but not new laws

Fair enough. I am not reserve but I was told I might be asked to re-enlist to help train new Scout/Snipers. They gave me a choice when I lost my leg either change MOS or take a honorable discharge, I discharged but would go back if it was strictly for training.

[tim929]

Originally Posted by stumbler

Because what you're actually saying is instead of restricting any access to guns make a much more stringent legally required system for some human beings to make a subjective judgment about who is and isn't a threat on any given day.

Have you ever lost your temper and looked crazy for a minute or two?

Ever had someone in authority over you that just really wanted to fuck you Over?

Ever seen One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest?

No no don't restrict guns. Expand government control over individuals because you believe in Freedom?

You missed it. The concept of restricting gun sales to the mentaly ill DOES restrict gun sales. Again, the number of crimes commited with class three firearms that outnumber the number of automatic weapons in the possesion of the military, federal agencies and the police is two since 1936. Thats a better ecord than any country in europe except we dont apply the same rules to all firearms. Just certain firearms...the belt fed, fully automatic kind with the ability to be loaded with linked belts of hundreds or even thousands of rounds which eliminates the concept of reloading altogether. The Virginia tech shooter did most of his killing with a simple ten shot .22 pistol. Tell me how hard it is to reload again. Here is a video of a very skilled professional competition shooter reloading. People with even relatively modest skills can manage to do them very quickly as well. Im living proof.

Quick side note on the video. Look at the position of his left hand. The thumb covers the slide stop allowing him to release the slide upon reloading. The slide locks to the rear after the last shot and after replacing the magazine its a simple matter of placing your hand back on the weapon and hitting a small lever to snap the weapon back into battery and ready to fire. He is using a very heavily customized Model 1911 .45 caliber handgun with an eight shot magazine. The most popular handgun in IPSC shooting competitions.



We have a system of reporting in place to prevent certain people for gaining access to firearms. Its called a criminal record. If you have one, when you go to a gun shop to buy a gun and they run your ID they get a big fat red flag that says "NOT ONLY NO, BUT HELL NO!" And then you get to explain to the police why you were trying to illegaly buy a firearm. Allowing parents...thats a key word here..PARENTS, counselors, psychiatrists, or even your regular doctor to inform authorities that you may not be suitable for firearms ownership and thus place the same simple notation on your ID that you cannot buy a gun isnt realy all that complicated. Many of these shooters parents have expressed intense frustration at not being able to get any sort of help or guidance regarding help for their sons who eventualy went on to slaughter people with guns they should never have had in the first place.

Originally Posted by ladygodiva123 There is a system in place to force people who need help to get it, but many people don't know how. You go to the county mental health facility and fill out paperwork and tell them why you think the person is a danger to themselves or others. If they agree they will get you to get the person somewhere where they can pick them up safely. They'll be held under observation for 72 hours. After that, if they think the person needs to stay under their care they'll go before a judge. The person has a right to an attorney of course. How do I know this? I had to do it with my father. I think people either don't know they can do this or they can't bring themselves to do it. It's really really hard.

As for laws keeping mentally ill people from getting guns, talk to the NRA. They fight ANY kind of gun control.

Its not anywhere near as simple as all that. I work with the mentaly ill and I can tell you that even those who are well known in the mental health system dont get admitted that easily. If you are unknown to the system, in most jurisdictions it requires the involvement of the local or county police in a violent incident that compels law enforcement to deem you to be enough of a threat to be admitted for observation. It is not possible for parents to do it just by filling out some papers. A dear old frined of mine whom I have known since kindergarten was shot and killed by police recently because he allegedly tried to assault the police with an axe. He had been known to law enforcement as a problem, paranoid schizophrenic for two decades and in that time, despite his parents best efforts and law enforcement reccomendations was only commited once for six days in that time.

The system of reporting a possible threat shouldnt require commitment or even a proper evaluation to red flag the person. Getting the red flag eliminated should require the oppinions of mental health professionals and extensive interviews with the individual in question. By not allowing just anyone to do it you can eliminate almsot all of the false reporting for purposes of harassment or revenge. Parents and professionals only. Maybe a spouse. The shooter in Colorado had been reported to the authorities but they have no power to red flag a person unless a crime has been commited. Without that its just a report in a file and thats just wrong.

[ridgerunner]

tim a criminal record does not automaticaly preclude someone from buying a firearm in america
as was shown with the temple shooter
he had multiple dui/dwi's on his record in 3 states
he was also known to be a racist and a member of a hate music band
but he bought his pistol legaly????

[xnxxbob]

Originally Posted by ridgerunner

tim a criminal record does not automaticaly preclude someone from buying a firearm in america
as was shown with the temple shooter
he had multiple dui/dwi's on his record in 3 states
he was also known to be a racist and a member of a hate music band
but he bought his pistol legaly????

A FELONY conviction excludes you from being able to buy a gun in all 50 states.

A dishonorable dischage from the military excludes you from buying a gun in all 50 states.

[deviousdave]

Do Americans need so many guns? Probably not
Is it their right to own them? Yes it is.

What do you expect though? You live in a country where every cop is armed. The government spends 3/4 of a trillion dollars of YOUR tax money on military. Most of Hollywood movies are centred around violence and guns and so on.

These mass killings are not something you can legislate against, they are not something you can prevent, not unless you want to bring the intrusive airport style security to all public places. No one is to blame, except for the killers themselves. Any changes to gun laws will have zero effect, other than disarming those that abide by the law. I have seen it first hand in my own country.

What concerns me is not the mass killings, nor the gangs that kill each other, but the 3 year old that finds his father's pistol on the floor next to the sofa, or the neighbour that decides to blow you away with his shotgun because your dog bit his cat. What really seems to be the problem in the USA is the number of gun accidents that you just don't see in the rest of the modern world.

[stumbler]

Originally Posted by xnxxbob

A FELONY conviction excludes you from being able to buy a gun in all 50 states.

A dishonorable dischage from the military excludes you from buying a gun in all 50 states.

Its not just felonies. If you're marijuana user you can't legally buy of even possess a gun and ammunition.

Medical-marijuana patients angered by firearms limits

HELENA, Mont. – Robbie Regennitter is a registered medical-marijuana patient.

Regennitter says he ingests approximately 10-20 milligrams of THC — the active compound in marijuana — each night before bed to ease the painful symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux disease and an esophagus condition.



Regennitter is also a hunter and gun owner. According to a new memo from the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, it is illegal for him or any registered medical-marijuana patient to own or possess firearms or ammunition.


The letter written last week by ATF Assistant Director Arthur Herbert to all federal firearms licensees gave them guidance on what to do if a firearms customer reveals that he or she is a medical-marijuana patient.


According to the letter, "any person who uses or is addicted to marijuana, regardless of whether his or her state has passed legislation authorizing marijuana use for medicinal purposes, is an unlawful user of or addicted to a controlled substance, and is prohibited by federal law from possessing firearms or ammunition."

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/...uns/50607606/1

[kydave]

Originally Posted by stumbler

Tim I've spent a day or two shooting guns myself and I'm doubting you can shoot a clip and reload another before I can slap it out of your hand because you still got to lock and load between changes.

Like I said one little old lady managed to slap the second clip our of the Phoenix killer's hand.

And what kind of skill does it take to hit people in crowded places. Flock shooting works just fine in those instances. All they have to do is just keep pulling that trigger. And don't forge the Aurora killer was hitting people in the theater next door.

These guys aren't shooters or hunters. They are video game trained. And they are shooting fish in barrel. Its actually harder to miss in that situation than it is to hit with ever bullet.

Finally, if I know one thing its that as long as there's lead in the air there's always a chance of hitting something. And 100 round magazines give you a lot more chances.

Ok I lied. The Stockton shooter was shooting a lot more distance at moving targets than your average mass killer and he wasn't even really aiming. But you're talking a playground full of elementary kids running for their lives and the teachers trying to save them.

Fuck man I'll tell you straight up. Just because the kill rate was low that's the scene that told me we were fucking gun nuts. I still can't bear even my on imagination of what those kids when through with someone shooting them for sport.



I agree. Specifically what is your solution. How should we handle this? What is the process? Who is in charge of the list?

But remember right now the NRA is fighting to keep it legal for people on a terrorist watch list to buy guns. There's people right here defending that.



Again I'm all for it. But could you give my your definition of mental illness? I mean who determines that and how? How do you know if this person who has been reported as a mental illness threat isn't the innocent husband of some really pissed off bitchy wife?

By the way what's the infrastructure for reporting this? Suppose someone tells his psychiatrist you know I've been wondering sometimes if I shouldn't commit a mass killing in some crowded place?

Ok so that's a definite warning that should trigger your no guns for nuts policy. What's to keep him from walking out of that psychiatrist's walking into the local gun store, buying two guns with 50 shot clips and 100 rounds of ammo and just start massacring people on his way home?

And when you figure those odds also try to figure the odds of a Marine Corp Sniper with a .50 caliber in the theater if we had more liberal gun laws instead of restrictions. Because when I do the math just by the number of Marine Snipers I've encountered on the internet since this shooting it comes out to more than 100% because apparently there are more Marine Corp snipers on the internet than there are actual Marines.



No, no now I'm really willing to honestly discuss this with you but you've also got to look at all sides of it.

Because what you're actually saying is instead of restricting any access to guns make a much more stringent legally required system for some human beings to make a subjective judgment about who is and isn't a threat on any given day.

Have you ever lost your temper and looked crazy for a minute or two?

Ever had someone in authority over you that just really wanted to fuck you Over?

Ever seen One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest?

No no don't restrict guns. Expand government control over individuals because you believe in Freedom?

I was so looking forward to something other than stumblers bad ass response.He truly thinks he is the shit.Slap A gun out of a persons hands,Give me a fucking break old man,did you take ur geratol today?Come slap one out of my hands please.

[kydave]

Originally Posted by stumbler

Look even if the guy was on a federal terrorist watch list the NRA and conservative/Republican/Tea Party is insisting he still be able to buy guns.

Are you the toughest mother fucker you know?
Hiding behind ur computer and feeling like superman are we?

[thikdik]

Originally Posted by Nymphette2

After the latest mass murder committed by a lawful gun carrying citizen in Denver. I guess the NRA , Ted Nudgent et al, will say its just another random thing, the maybe 50th random shooting/murder by a licensed gun owner this year alone.

However this one left 12 dead and 50 wounded, whats it going to take before Americans realize that their neighbor is NOT a responsible gun owner and it's better they all give up their guns, for every ones safety.

Lets start by executing every murderer in jail who used a gun in a crime and watch the problem decrease.

[kydave]

Originally Posted by thikdik

Lets start by executing every murderer in jail who used a gun in a crime and watch the problem decrease.

AGREED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[CS natureboy]

Originally Posted by thikdik

Lets start by executing every murderer in jail who used a gun in a crime and watch the problem decrease.

Just think of the money that would be saved as well.

The cost of keeping a person in prison on a life term averages $1.5 million.

I say hang em high with a rope. Rope is cheap and re-useable!

[stumbler]

Originally Posted by kydave

I was so looking forward to something other than stumblers bad ass response.He truly thinks he is the shit.Slap A gun out of a persons hands,Give me a fucking break old man,did you take ur geratol today?Come slap one out of my hands please.

What a chickenshit little liar. I never said a thing about slapping a gun out of someone's hand. I said I bet I can slap a clip out of your hand before you can lock and load.

And I say that with some confidence because that's what a little old lady in Tucson Arizona did to end the mass killing taking place.

Originally Posted by kydave

Are you the toughest mother fucker you know?
Hiding behind ur computer and feeling like superman are we?

Tougher than you I bet. And I can tell by the way you just run your ignorant mouth.

But thanks for doing all that reading. Even if you didn't get it right I bet it was still a lot of work for you.